Sexual Dystopia: A Glimpse At The Future

A recurring theme here, and one that has gone wholly underappreciated by our elites on the Left and the Right, is how insidiously the culture and the sexual market have changed since the advent of the Four Sirens of the Sexual Apocalypse. As a helpful reminder, here are the four sirens I’m talking about:

Effective and widely available contraceptives (the Pill, condom, and the de facto contraceptive abortion).

Easy peasy no-fault divorce.

Women’s economic independence (hurtling towards women’s economic advantage if the college enrollment ratio is any indication).

Rigged feminist-inspired laws that have caused a disincentivizing of marriage for men and an incentivizing of divorce for women.

As I have written, these changes are slowly, but powerfully, tectonically shifting the courtship playing field. The big winners are alpha males and the big losers are beta males. Alpha females continue to do well because their beauty is so rare that they can successfully leverage their mating capital even when market conditions turn unfavorable. Beta females lose their long term advantage under the new dispensation at the gain of an ephemeral, deceptively alluring short term advantage. The modern PUA, an amalgam of the wisdom of old-fashioned rakes and the science of new-fangled evolutionary psychology, is one outgrowth of this massive and heretofore misapprehended trend.

We’ve had 40 years of this informally polygamous system killing us softly, and the results can be seen directly in delayed age of first marriage, rising divorce rates, decreasing fertility, and harem volunteerism, and indirectly through the coarsening and bastardization of American sensibility and governmental policy (e.g., Title IX, multicult suicide pact, AA, open borders, the ascendence of the therapy culture, and just about every assinine court decision since).

Maxim #66: The worst thing to happen to America was women’s suffrage.

Naturally, changes on this scale don’t happen overnight. There was a store of good will and optimistic future time orientation bequeathed us by our beta male forebears — the men of the 19th and 20th centuries who built America into the hyperpower that made France shit its knickers — that will take generations to dissolve into the watery gruel of transnationalist solipsistic hedonism. We may even witness brief moments of cultural comeback, but the overall trend is unmistakeable. We are going the way of Rome.

A few months ago I had an email exchange with Randall Parker who writes two blogs I enjoy – Parapundit and Futurepundit. I wondered aloud what Greg Cochran — co-author of a PC shibboleth-smashing book about how human evolution has sped up in the last 10,000 years (and judging by his online persona a royal prick (my kind of guy) held in high esteem by his fellow genomic scientists) — anticipated the future shape of human evolution would take given the sexual marketplace changes I’ve written about on my blog. Specifically, I wanted to know if the Four Sirens would speed up human evolution even faster than the dawn of agriculture. This was Parker’s and Cochran’s reply (via R. Parker):

Contraception is a selective pressure for the desire to make babies and for less planning. Women who want to make babies won’t use the pill. Women who can’t plan for dinner won’t plan for getting a doctor’s appointment for a contraceptive prescription. I’ve written posts about this on FuturePundit. An Australian twins study found that Catholicism and fewer years of education are both positively correlated with fertility (no surprise on either score).

I asked Greg and Henry about this. Greg says in theory one can calculate the speed at which higher fertility will be selected for. But Henry says there’s not good data on the heritability of fertility.

As for other selective pressures: Greg has speculated that people will become more loyal to family. So the world will become more like the Middle East. Not good.

Unencumbered by post-Christian ethics, the Chinese government recently passed a pre-1945-style eugenics law calling for the sterilization of “morons.” The ruthlessness of this law portends that if China implements genetic enhancements while the multiculturalist West either bans them or pursues a politically correct reengineering of human nature, the inevitable result within a few generations would be Chinese economic, and thus military, global hegemony. As the weapons scientist and evolutionary theorist Gregory Cochran pointed out, “We cannot opt out of this biological arms race any more than we could opt out of the nuclear arms race.” Therefore, those serious about either preventing or decreeing genetic engineering should start planning a preemptive nuclear strike on China, and soon.

Time to speculate about the future. In sum, we will have more people with lower future time orientation (i.e., the temperament to save for a rainy day and delay gratification for greater future gain), more impulsiveness (great for knocking up broads, not so great for building and sustaining first world levels of civilization), and more distrust of societal institutions in favor of tighter familial bonds (great for aspiring warlords and corrupt kleptocrats, not so great for maintaining a loyal national military or respect for the law or a basic sense of fairness).

In possibly what will turn out to be the juiciest irony in all of human history, feminism and its co-ideologies of deceit may usher in an America that looks more like a patriarchal Middle Eastern caliphate of their worst nightmares. The realization of the matricentric utopia that feminism has been clamoring for these last few generations will undo the very foundation upon which the rancid ideology was able to prop itself.

Human nature does not offer us a bottomless chest of treasure. Few are exempt from trade-offs, and no society can have everything its heart desires. To restore American greatness and comity of its people, feminism and its cousin -isms will have to be rolled back. This will mean women will sacrifice their earning power and some career freedom. The alternative is what we have now — economically independent women, freed from shame and the restrictions of their biology by the pill and abortion, following their vaginas straight into soft polygamy, state-supported single motherhood, and grossly unjust payday divorce settlements.

Now I will tell you how to save America from this fate. The answer will surprise some of you:

More PUAs.

America is beyond saving in the traditional ways. The rot has metastasized. There will be no glorious beta male uprising. Like one of the commenters from yesterday’s post pointed out, the first cute girl to bat her eyelashes at one of these revolutionary Che Betas will have him betraying the brotherhood faster than you can say “just the tip”. Nor will there be a repeal of the 19th Amendment, though there should be (and, no, I am really not kidding about that. Exhibit A: Cuntrag).

No, the solution is to give the New Girl Order *exactly* what it wants: Game, and an army of cads that practice it. Force feed the beast until it is choking on its own gluttony. The emissaries of the Great Lie must have the consequences of their ignorance and treachery shoved down their throats. In time, the unabashed pursuit of hedonism and the embrace of Darwinistic nihilism (two potent forces which, coincidentally, happen to have truth and pleasure on their side. Exhibit B: God is dead) will raze the neoliberal monolith to the ground, and from the ashes the eternal human cycle will begin anew, strengthened and revitalized. A complete reconciliation with our tragic destiny gives us the only chance to avoid it.

Like this:

Related

611 Responses

In possibly what will turn out to be the the juiciest irony in all of human history, feminism and its co-ideologies of deceit may usher in an America that looks more like a patriarchal Middle Eastern caliphate of their worst nightmares.

economic note. Normal people don’t know what the term structure of the interest rates means, but it is getting steeper and people should be worried.

Obama’s deficit looks like unsustainable. So holders of American Sovereign Bonds (i.e. treasuries) are selling American bonds of long duration (specially the 10 year bond) and buying shorter durations. The markets are essentially accepting a zer interesto rate to lend to the US government for very short maturities, like 30, 60 and 90 days

The big movers in this are Central banks, specially China, Russia and Brazil. If the amount of “long” bonds (those which last 10 years or more) sold and the number of shorter bonds bought grow enough to reach critical mass, an Argentine like collapse of the US economy will occur

the beta revolution is a nerdish masturbation. the number of PUAs is largely given by genetics. Both AJ and Roissy’s views are unrealistic

but a collapse of the bond markets due to market doubts about the sustainability of the American Public debt is a possible scenario. I leave to others to think how a collapse of credit markets would affect sexual dynamics

A dystopia (from the Greek δυσ- and τόπος, alternatively, cacotopia,[1] kakotopia, cackotopia, or anti-utopia) is the vision of a society in which conditions of life are miserable and characterized by poverty, oppression, war, violence, disease, pollution, and/or the abridgement of human rights, resulting in widespread unhappiness, suffering, and other kinds of pain.

Don’t you know we create our own reality? Why concern yourself so much with what others create for themselves? It’s just a big tragic distraction. Giving your attention to this kind of crap only insures you’ll experience it yourself. Sure, it’s interesting. To a point, but you use the word “dystopia” so often, I finally had to look it up.

What’s fascinating to me is how the recipe for success has changed for young men. All through traditional literature, as far as I can tell, young men were advised to be honorable, to follow a particular philosophy in their conduct with other men, and so on.

Never, as far as I am aware, have young men been advised to appeal to women on a sexual level.

Not in classical literature, to the best of my knowledge.

Not in Shakespeare’s “Hamlet,” where Polonius tells his son Laertes to neither a lender nor a borrower be, and to his own self be true.

Not in Rudyar Kipling’s majestic poem “If” that he wrote for his son.

But I believe the times have changed. “More PUAs” might not necessarily be a bad move. And certainly, telling conservatives to get their heads out of their asses about the nature of women is long overdue.

I leave to others to think how a collapse of credit markets would affect sexual dynamics

As a bond trader – I think this could be really interesting.

First thought – the diminished availability of credit will mean that betas can’t over-extend themselves with nice cars, fancy apartments, and big credit card debt in hopes of wooing a girl. Without ‘materialism’ game (a false idol) to lean on, will betas be forced to learn game?

Presumably, the county is more likely to try to increase revenues to pay for increased debt costs than they are to decrease spending. A higher marginal tax rate disincentivizes (real word?) high earners, leading to the same result as above.

The deteriorating fiscal situation of the US and the growing competitiveness and productivity of China leads to a consumption-based cultural boom there similar to the US boom of the 50s. Utopia for Asian-obsessed betas until ’empowered’ Chinese women learn the power of the cuckold.

I would like to assume that every one of your presises and conclusions are correct, for the sake of argument. The reason that I want to assume these things is because there is a much more fundamental question.

Why should I care about saving the United States?

What is in if for me? And by that I mean what is in it directly for me? Will I make more money? Get more pussy? Get higher on new and interesting drugs? Live longer?

Sure, it would be nice to be a superhero, save the world and do the right thing, but then again it would be nice to have a money tree or a flying car. Sure, it would be nice.

But is it even possible and, if it is, why would I want to?

I do not tilt at windmills, I do not volunteer and I have no problems leaving any country to live somewhere else once I get enough money. Give me some good reasons to please. Seriously.

“America is beyond saving in the traditional ways. The rot has metastasized.”

“The emissaries of the Great Lie must have the consequences of their ignorance and treachery shoved down their throats.”

This is exactly the conclusion I have come to.We are too far gone for any WHISKEY-like return to “the good ol’ days.”For one,as KAMAL has astutely noted,”the good ‘ol days” werent really that good to begin with.But,if per impossibile,we could somehow return and somehow sweep all the dust back under the rug we will have let the assassins off the hook all too easily.Future generations looking back on our decision will rightly curse us.

All that we would accomplish is to reset the clock-hands back to an earlier position.And you know what happens when you do that,dont you?They simply move forward again to the very position from which you changed them.

Never, as far as I am aware, have young men been advised to appeal to women on a sexual level.

That’s exaggerated. The sexual appeal was usually sublimated into romantic appeal. That combined being honorable in society with being individually heroic and outstanding, though usually with an emphasis on the later.

One can also exaggerate the degree to which raw male sexual appeal alone is now ascendant even in “bar pickup scene girls”, as opposed to a more rounded appeal of general macho, emotion teasing and light mind playing, and status in some hierarchy, combined with the raw sexual appeal. In fact different mixes work best with different girls, I think.

All the “four sirens of the sexual apocalypse” are exogenous factors that cause “tectonically shifting the courtship playing field”. The solution offered here, i.e., more PUAs, is entirely endogenous. It is hard to imagine attitude change itself could reverse the change happened and happening due to a set of exogenous factors. Even if it does, it would take a long time to show any effect. Imagine there are hawks and doves in both gender, would an increase in the percentage of hawks in one gender increase the percentage of doves in the other?

This is a good read but shows a bit of logical overreaching in certain respects. First, it’s doubtful that human evolution (i.e., makeup of the gene pool) IN AGGREGATE has changed much as a result of modern civilization – which in the context of the social changes discussed on this blog is the last 100-150 years or so, and restricted to in the advanced socities of the west, which remain a small minority of the species. Despite the material advances associated with globalization, much of humainty remains in a Hobbesian state of nature, and so well-equipped, hindbrain-wise, for that environment.

Second, though the fertility bias selectivity toward stupider and more family-oriented people may or may not be real – how do you get to a fundamentalist “caliphate” from there? (note: that’s a very specific historical concept that is misused here.) More like “Idiocracy”. Your Rome analogy is more accurate: societies in advanced states of prosperity-induced moral and cultural decay keep declining until they are eclipsed by more disciplined and relatively “primitive” barbarian hordes. That is to say, they are invaded by the hordes; they don’t become them.

The corrupt elites continue to slide until the values that undergirded their prosperity are gone, but they don’t really return to the old values of religion, etc. The barbarian early post-Roman Christian empires were Gothic, Visigothic, etc. – not Roman. This also included a major shift in religion, though, from pagan to early Chrsitian – so, maybe we’re in store for something like that eventually. A new religion that ecplises the fading, hypocritical, out-of-touch Christianity that looks a lot more today like the fading paganism of ancient Rome than the vibrant faith it was in its early centuries.

More interesting are the short-term solutions for today that might actually come to pass – that is, the opposite of A.J.s highly unlikely Beta Revolt of 2010. Rolling back female suffrage is highly unlikely, but what about gradual court reversals of divorce precedents that are highly unjust? Means-testing for alimony and child support? MPT? These might help at the margins, and, as noted here earlier, even a little bit of constraint on female behavior might have a disproportionate effect.

One advantage the U.S. has compared to its similarly decadent European counterpart is a blue-collar heartland that, though beaten down by economic change, still cherishes some of the old values: male prerogative, military values, old-fashioned patriotism, skilled manual labor, etc. Immigration, despite its mixed effect on the economic base, also brings in a large number of people from more traditional societies, with higher birthrates, that Americanize almost compeltely in the next generation (usually to the consternation of the parents from the old country). This is in contrast to European immigration, in which the mostly Muslim immigrant groups stew in hostile, unassimilated, subsidized separate communities.

Am I saying there’s hope for us yet? No, I basically agree with Roissy’s analysis, mainly because there’s no way our society can ever put the genie of female empowerment, with all its unintgended malign consequences, back in the bottle. The sooner the crisis hits, the sooner the reserve of more traditional values may be able to help get us out of it. But there is more reslience and flexibility in this society than there may seem.

Alpha females were clear net losers in the sexual revolution. I explain why here. Beta females win or lose based on how suited they are for short term relationships. Betas just flat out lost a lot. Only Alpha males unequivocally benefitted, though there are dangers too for the Alpha male who doesn’t know when to get out.

I think American society is going to eventually ending up following the path of South Korea on this. South Korea has has all of those features, with the additional factor added in that most Korean men(Koreans in Korea, not Korean-Americans) do not have any game in the Western sense. It’s really hard for a Korean man to meet a woman with these dystopian conditions, and so right now an incredible 14% of marriages in Korea involve an international partner(http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/22/world/asia/22brides.html?_r=1&em&ex=1172379600&en=cc9bd4e8fc6996c1&ei=5087) Most of these involve mail order brides from SE Asia.

As the dating market worsens here, a lot more Beta men are going to realize that going from being low status to being a rock star is a matter of stepping on a plane. I know a number of guys who have married internationally- and if the alternative is waiting to marry some overweight 35 year old who has ridden 30 different alphas(and still plans on keeping up her alpha habit after tying the knot), more men will take their chances overseas in East Europe, Asia, Latin America, and Africa.

Of course, the USA is not Korea, and feminism is a lot more entrenched here. You’re going to see a lot of opposition to this trend, a lot of feminist shaming tactics. We’ll probably see attempts to make it difficult to marry foreigners from a coalition of feminist women/oppportunistic alphas/wimpy SWPL betas who take whatever position is politically correct so their non-date girlfriends will praise them.

Roissy Maxim #66: The worst thing to happen to America was women’s suffrage.

Yet another thing we can blame John Stuart Mill for. I don’t think you could practically get a repeal of women’s sufferage. Anyway, most of the damage is really done by single women. Married women tend to vote almost exactly like their husbands. So the best thing would be to restrict the vote to married people with children. Single men aren’t so bad, but they tend to be a bit overly libertarian, so we’d gain by taking away their vote too.

The best thing conservatives could do is restrict the franchise. In addition to single women, the left half of the bell curve really has no business voting. See Caplan’s excellent recent book The Myth of the Rational Voter.

Roissy Maxim #66: The worst thing to happen to America was women’s suffrage.

Yet another thing we can blame John Stuart Mill for. I don’t think you could practically get a repeal of women’s sufferage. Anyway, most of the damage is really done by single women. Married women tend to vote almost exactly like their husbands. So the best thing would be to restrict the vote to married people with children. Single men aren’t so bad, but they tend to be a bit overly libertarian, so we’d gain by taking away their vote too.

The best thing conservatives could do is restrict the franchise. In addition to single women, the left half of the bell curve really has no business voting. See Caplan’s excellent recent book The Myth of the Rational Voter.

The corrupt elites continue to slide until the values that undergirded their prosperity are gone, but they don’t really return to the old values of religion, etc.

The fundamental problem is a shift in religion now. The shift towards widespread fundamental leftism, now mainstream and encapsulated in the now mainstream doctrine of Political Correctness, which is taboo to much challenge except jokingly around the edges or in often anonymous corners on the internet.

puerile liberalism fosters personal pleasure over gritty, personal responsibility: it’s more fun to collect disability, eat Big Macs, fuck all day and play Wii than it is to carve out a frontier and create a functional government.

The prediction of our munificent host will happen – just after many destructive periods of total upheaval and subsequent labored incarnations to dial it in. Germany 1917-1965. France 1800 – until?

It will be a synthesis of many revolutionary failures. We won’t live to see any fruitful results.

Unencumbered by post-Christian ethics, the Chinese government recently passed a pre-1945-style eugenics law calling for the sterilization of “morons

Oh dear, this is scary😦

Who decides who is/not a moron? What about the intelligent but socially inept people? do we sterilize them too? What about the intelligent but not unattractive people? Do you sterilize them? What about the women who are drop dead gorgeous but dumb as a bag of broken crayons, do we sterilize them? Probably not for that last question since too many men will be weak in the knees for a chance to taste what they have.

@Thursday – there’s a redistributive element to that as well in today’s massive welfare state. the left half of the bell curve pays negative net taxes- that is, receives more in benefits from the system than it ever pays into it. So they will always vote to keep the benefits flowing at the expense of the higher earners, and capital class, that pays more than 50%of the taxes. All this courtesy of the post-30s Democratic party. there’s a reason the founders restricted the franchise to property holders.

I am reminded of the saying used to describe de Tocqueville’s work, “it took a Frenchman to describe America”; so in the future it should be said that it took a PUA to inform the masses of the dangers of sexual immorality and stupid theories of enfranchisement.

A quick question about the supposed rise of illegitimacy.Is the increasing percentage of single mothers the result of looser morals,or simply the decline of overall fertility as a result of the abandonment of Beta-boys and traditional coupling?In other words,are there really more unwed moms in absolute terms nowadays,or are they only relatively in greater abundance?

Things will be fine. Progress comes from people two standard deviations beyond the mean in drive, intelligence, and work ethic. The idea of the mean drifting downward has little effect on the “right tail.” Think of it as an increased labor supply – it’s a structural shift in the economy, but not necessarily a terrible one.

As one myself, I’ll say that a libertarian’s weakness is being impractical. I might believe that we should have a 10% flat tax or do away with entitlement programs tomorrow, but then no one is really going to listen to me, are they?

Libertarian is more of a political philosophy than a real strategy or platform.

@doug – PC leftism as a religion? no, it’s an offshoot of reational, enlightmentment, anti-relilgious thinking. (See Thurssday’s reference to Mill above.) I don’t think it matches the passion and intensity of a true religion (see: bin Laden, Zawahiri, etc.) and could never be a true religious movement of the kind that needs to sweep our decadent West away. It’s the highest expression of the decadence itself.

@chic- who decides who’s a moron? The State Board of Moron Sterilization, that’s who. Or whatever you want to call it. Where you draw the line, in that particular logic, is less inportant than the fact that it is done at all. The closest thing to this in the West we will ever have is the death penalty: society pulling the weeds of the violently criminal. But otherwise, the protection of individual rights inherent in our DNA makes something like that legally and culturally impossible.

Incidentally, there was a brief vogue of eugenics in the U.S. in the 1920s – both in the culture and the government. This was probably in response to cultural fears after the end of the largest wave of uncontrolled immigration in the country’s history. Remember Oliver Wendell Holmes’s famous opinion on the Supreme Court case involving a state law for involuntary sterilzation of the retarded: “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” Would we could go back to those days.

One advantage the U.S. has compared to its similarly decadent European counterpart is a blue-collar heartland that, though beaten down by economic change, still cherishes some of the old values: male prerogative, military values, old-fashioned patriotism, skilled manual labor, etc.

The rot goes deep. Rural inhabitants don’t behave much different than their urban cousins, and the bottom is falling out from underneath Christianity in the U.S. Pretty soon the U.S. bible belt won’t be any larger than the Dutch.

Immigration, despite its mixed effect on the economic base, also brings in a large number of people from more traditional societies, with higher birthrates, that Americanize almost compeltely in the next generation (usually to the consternation of the parents from the old country).

The people who theoretically disapprove of premarital sex tend to have the most of it. In practice, Mexican and S. American immigrants tend to assimilate more towards black ghetto norms than traditional bourgeois values.

The people who theoretically disapprove of premarital sex tend to have the most of it.

Mexicans specifically or are you claiming hyprocrisy as the rule? Somehow I doubt the average teenage Indian-American girl (dot, not feather) is having less sex than the daughter of an ’empowered’ former-slut-turned-high-powered-lawyer cheating on her husband with the pool boy.

In practice, Mexican and S. American immigrants tend to assimilate more towards black ghetto norms than traditional bourgeois values.

I’m guessing this is just a complete guess based on nothing but personal bias, right?

I personally think single motherhood is the bigger issue. The pill, women’s suffrage, women earning more than men etc… aren’t a problem. The pill is a good thing, without it many women would have ten or more children. How many men can afford to feed such a large family today? The rhythm method(catholic BC) does not work for all women. If I work the same amount of hrs as my male coworkers & contribute equally, why shouldn’t I get paid the same amount.

The bigger question men should be asking themselves is why women don’t want to get married? Why is that most women would prefer to live alone with a dog or cat versus living with a man. Some women don’t even* want the company of an alpha male for long periods of time. Why is that so? We see the same pattern from country to country anywhere women are given equal access to education, jobs, and birth control. So this moves beyond race &culture, maybe it speaks to something about the base nature of women?
If you think most women would willingly give up birthcontrol, education, and equal access to jobs, you are fooling yourself. Having an education and equal access to jobs ensures a woman the ability to take care herself is she doesn’t want to get married, one of the below level “4” women who can’t find a husband, finds herself a widow or just prefers to be by herself.
Most men are beta and will continue to be beta. The advanced level of civilization that we have here in the Untied States can’t run properly without betas or those who are willing to do the grunt work will others take the lead. To many men are jealous of the attention that the top dog gets. It’s like my great-grandmother says, everybody want to be the chief but nobody wants to be the Indian(Native American).

P.S. believe it or not, there are plenty of American women who don’t go galloping around in bars looking for alpha peen. Even those who do have a choice of deciding who they don’t or do want to be with. You can’t force anyone to like you. I love Reggie Williams but he probably wouldn’t spit on me if I was on fire. Guess what, I’m not bitter about it either.

I honestly don’t know what the “end game” is here, though I’m fairly certain that, as you mention, there isn’t likely to be any great gettin’ up morning among the Betas any time soon, if ever. Simply put, life’s too good for them, even now, and only in the event of extreme deprivation-which admittedly, the threshold for White Males of a certain class is markedly different than for Black ones of another I suspect-will any serious talk, let alone action, on the part of Betas occur.

Nor do I see *any* move or thought, on the part of the Feminist Lobby or their chief supporters, Women, *ever* voluntarily giving up their “gains”. And of course, those Alphas at the top of Poon Pyramid have a vested interest in seeing to it that such a thing doesn’t happen either.

So, yea, I’d have to agree with you, in the main-“feeding the beast” may just be the way out. But, I think its important to keep in mind, that for many guys, goin’ off the grid will be just as an attractive option, and in many ways, just as deadly, if not moreso. In a lot of ways, its like high blood pressure, a kind of silent kill.

I really don’t have a problem with American men marrying foreign brides. However, if you think men from Russia, one of the former Russian republics, or China are going to let you swoop in to take their best looking women, well sir you have another think coming.Check out how even PA gets a little testy when you guys start posting about taking Polish women.

As one myself, I’ll say that a libertarian’s weakness is being impractical. I might believe that we should have a 10% flat tax or do away with entitlement programs tomorrow, but then no one is really going to listen to me, are they?

I was talking about lower class, low IQ people who tend to strongly disapprove of premarital sex, but have a lot of it. I wasn’t talking about conservative Middle Class Evangelicals, Mormons and Catholics, who tend to do a better job of keeping it in their pants.

I’m guessing this is just a complete guess based on nothing but personal bias, right?

@Thursday, SA – you were getting at uneducated immigration, but what about the engineers, programmers, doctors, professors, etc. from the highest reaches of societies such as China, India, S. America, Middle East? They are fewer in number, perhaps, than the other kind, but are changing the character of the elite somewhat. Hispanic/Mexcian low-end immigration in particular is more complex that you portrayed it – there is a ladder up to the lower middle clas that still exists and is used in many communities.

Also, I don’t see the “bottom falling out” of American Christianity at all. The megachurches of the heartland are as vibrant and full as ever. There may be hypocrisy out there, but there always was. They view themselves of the custodians of a certain history and tradition in this country that has been lost by the elites, and they’re probably right. My argument above was that they may still be around to pick up the pieces after the false SWPL utopia has collapsed.

However, if you think men from Russia, one of the former Russian republics, or China are going to let you swoop in to take their best looking women, well sir you have another think coming.

Russian men are too drunk to care and besides all that alcoholism has created a man shortage.

Women in mainland China hold the whip hand in the marriage market. The sex ratio there is really bad for men. If you want a Chinese wife, you are best to look among the minority populations around SE Asia.

Single motherhood is something that should be looked down upon*. Women really think they can do it all and they can’t. Certainly not with a male child and little money. One woman having three children and no husband is no longer given the firm taken down unless it’s by older women. Some are dumb enough to believe that some “good” man will marry them. With each baby, the chances of finding a good man diminish.

“we all know how the foreign brides come to marry American men FOR LOVE.”
—-Real marriage isn’t based on love, shit-for-brains, that’s some of your feminazi utopia mixed with Mariah Carey bullshit.

Marriage is based on duty; most foreign brides understand this duty and uphold it so long as their man does his. Marriage is a bargain, a contract, for the purposes of having children and supporting society.

One thing Roissy didn’t post that I think is important is the states role in child raising/discipline*. How many parents are afraid to discipline their children for fear of having the authorities called? Had the mother slapped her son back in that little clip from the dr. Phil show I posted some time ago, she would have been called a child abuser and maybe had him taken away.

*yes yes I know some children are physically abused by their parents but parents who physically discipline their children are not abusers. Some children seem to only respond to a good spanking

chic, for once, I agree with you. What was considered normal and healthy child rearing for 10,000 years—giving a child a whipping with a belt/reed—has becoem chidl abuse in the last 30 years. with no proof that it is.

The desire to repeal the 19th Amendment seems more spiteful than practically useful — much less, possible. Good luck getting the statistical majority to vote for state legislators to constitutionally disenfranchise them.

Retroactively gaming out the last few elections (ignoring, for brevity’s sake, primaries) sans women, we’d have George Bush, arguably the most disastrous president in nearly a century winning twice in landslides and we’d of course have a geriatric shadow of a man as president in John McCain right now.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but your position strikes me as contradictory. You’ve previously decried voting as pointless yet you apparently are wary of women voting. Now, if its that you believe voting is pointless because women have the vote, that makes a certain superficial sense, but the results of their voting (in the main) don’t really support what you’re saying.

The more identifiable problem is beta males, as they are by and large the protectionist “heroes” that have raised age of sexual consent to the absurd age of 18 in several states, are invariably the most ardent of male anti-abortion zealots (see: likely-omega vigilante assassin of Dr. Tiller), partake in religion at a high rate, and — as you’re continually pointing out — romanticize the role of women in society and give them undue influence out of their pathetic inability to get laid or to honestly pursue their instincts.

I think women, on average, have a physiological disadvantage (for natural reasons) in visual-spacial projection and perspective orientation, but not to the degree that would warrant them being excluded from constitutional rights such as voting.

In full disclosure, I’m banging a lot of women I have no long-term interest in and the current social-sexual regime suits my interests in this regard quite well. I don’t think I’m saving Western Civilization though I’ll keep that thought in mind next time I’m boning some daffy feminist in a degrading way.

@chic – have you been paying attention to all the posts and comments here? women choose not to get married in the same numbers as before because their equal/higher social status makes it almost impossible for them to “marry up” to a man of higher status or power. that unhappiness – the difference between what they have and are taught they should want and what their emotions/hindbrains crave – is the cause and scourge of beta msery, and the Alpha’s field of dreams.

I think male flight to foreign women or even to foreign countries in search of foreign women will begin in earnest very soon.

beta males created the problem by being eternal white knights to women, putting them on pedestals, being easy to manipulate, kowtowing to feminism. if they start flocking to foreign women, this won’t improve america, it will just ruin foreign women because they will spoil and pamper them. there are many places in the world where women turned into entitled, narcissistic shrews from getting their heads pumped up by western betas.

The solution: only NET taxpayers get to vote. ANY net taxpayer–men, women , children, black, white. no other restriction. the only way anyone who gets their paycheck from the government, even if they ARE the government, gets a vote is if they have an independent source of income which gives them enough taxes to pay that it offsets their taxpayer-funded salaries. this might discourage lifelong politicians.

otherwise, gov paycheck=no vote. get all the welfare you want, but no vote (not that welfare would long survive the massive downsizing of government this change would cause).

if a non-working woman is half of a joint filing couple that’s a net taxpayer–they get to vote. a single mom who sends her kids to public school, works as a social worker for some local government women’s make-work scheme “department” and gets her kids healthcare funded by SCHIP would NOT be able to vote. this alone would restrict the bad policies.

the only problem i foresee is the military, but i guess giving up the franchise would just be a trade-off for being paid and taken care of until death.

Hispanics in several generations will assimilate into American culture, much like past “non-assimilating, violent” cultures will do. Italians and Irish were once considered uncivilized people too. Ditto foreign-born black cultures (hatian). the current hispanic panic is merely the product of illegal immigration (which must be stopped for economic reasons) and heavy mexican drug trafficking currently.

American-born Blacks, however, have continually shown their resistance to the American way, and demand being taken care of while contributing little.

I think women, on average, have a physiological disadvantage (for natural reasons) in visual-spacial projection and perspective orientation, but not to the degree that would warrant them being excluded from constitutional rights such as voting.

The problem isn’t that women can’t think, it’s that they really don’t like to.

” So I assume you agree with this as long as the bride does her “duty” to you?”
—yep. So long as she cooks, cleans, makes a home warm, raises the kids, gives it up, keeps herself up, and stays loyal, I will work my fingers to the bone, give her free reign over my finances, keep myself in shape, take her out, and remain loyal.

You know, how marriage existed for thousands of years.

“waaah I don’t want to pay for women!”
–correction: I don’t want to pay for cheating, harpy whores like you.

as I said in a previous comment, “this is the dawning of the age of aquarius”.

“In sum, we will have more people with lower future time orientation (i.e., the temperament to save for a rainy day and delay gratification for greater future gain),”

my rebuttal to this is that incentive to invest i.e. interest rates will increase to induce people to invest for the long-haul. If people magically “evolve” a lower future time orientation, modern-day economies have evolved means to deal with this. I’ll have to think of situations in which this applies to physical investment and gratification.

“Roissy Maxim #66: The worst thing to happen to America was women’s suffrage.”

We have to take this maxim a step further. Universal male suffrage led to women’s suffrage. The un-landed, un-gentry would predictably be more wooed by the female’s siren call for equal rights at the voting booth; this is something that the aristocratic ruling class of decades past were wholly against since it decreased their power share. Female suffrage would have gained no foot-hold without the aid of males that had the avenues of power to get the votes through. This is yet another example of beta men usurping their brethern for a little taste of the pie.

The short-comings of democracy lend further credence to the natural hierarchy that human beings have yet to dismantle. Perhaps society operates best when a few at the top make all the decisions, fulfilling the platonic ideal.

I don’t see more PUA changing society any time soon. Something larger and more destructive, say mass warfare, famine, or plague will have a much more immediate and long-lasting effect. Those forces will re-shape the incentives and inducements that have created this culture’s modern dating landscape.

Those conservative religious “losers” tend to have significantly more children than others, and the conservative women who they have them with are just as attractive as any out there. These guys apparently do OK in the sexual marketplace.

In connecting the dots to our near-future, there may be other alternatives. If the Singularity arrives, human sentience may transcend biology completely. Also artificial wombs, father-only families, etc may yet get Western Men re-invested in the good of society again. Right now we are all checking-out because we have been told that any children we make aren’t really ours, and furthermore can be used as pawns against us to reduce us to eternal serfdom (especially when combined with a marriage/divorce/alimony one-two punch). So Science may yet save the day.

Chuck,
Interesting thoughts: but, if I may, what would be your rebuttal to the fact that, many of the “great unwashed” paid for their liberty, freedom, etc w/their bodies, ie, war? Surely, this would give them some degree of political leverage, yes? We cannot say the same for Women (whether that’s a good thing or not is up for debate insofar as I’m concerned), to date, they are exempt from the Draft.

tiller’s assassin, scott roeder, is a pawn. he was a disgruntled lower beta male who had nothing else going for him. within the past decade he had rocky relationships with his children. there are even court documents discussing his child custody cases. a case of another man who felt screwed by the system. its these beta men, men like mcveigh and the 9/11 hi-jackers that society will have to be wary of.

What is boils down to is many men are being passed by on the socio-economic ladder by women. As said in the post, you only have to look at the current gap of college enrollment and degrees awarded between sexes to see what’s coming.

I can see two reactions to this situation. One, women’s power over society will continue to increase. Instead of dating down, women that can’t secure an “equal” partner will turn to sperm banks, adoption, etc. Alpha males continue to reap benefits unless they are unlucky and become trapped by an unscrupulous woman. This has been talked about ad nauseam on this blog.

At the same time expect a rise in crime, particularly against women. The men society is trampling upon still have the same needs (and oversexed media has done nothing to discourage it). To get their needs met, undersexed and unemployed/lowly employed men will do what they’ve always done in the past: form gangs. From that point, just follow the logic as an increased police presence needed will lead to higher taxes, leading to further lack of respect for the law, which decays society.

Even if it doesn’t happen exactly like that, we’re one solid economic depression away from real social changes. America’s economy used to be insulated from global forces thanks to its ingenuinity and a combination of diplomacy/force/coercion abroad. The wealth accumulated over generations is depleting at a decent rate, scattered according to the whims of globalization.

“I don’t know where you got that, but there’s really no way to prove or disprove that about me”
—-Right. A feminazi “independent” harpy is never a cheater. Nope. You’re as solid as a rock.

” I have never lived off the government’s”
—except that you make up arbitrary standards of conduct through the government through PC-ness, sex harassment, divorce, and affirmative action to disparage the men who do your work better than you do.

But you don’t suck the government’s teat, oh noes….

“I have never cheated on anyone….”
—-“well, unless you count Ted, but that was just a one night thing. And making out with a bartender? Who doesn’t do that? it was Mardi Gras! And please, Marcus and I were practically broken up when I let his frat brothers gang bang me.”

Women: liars till the end.

“I typically avoid that like the plague. ”
–Translation: men seem to hate my shrewish, harridan rants and bitching all the time. I wonder why.

I think betas will have their day if (when) the US financial collapse turns into a full-on societal collapse, and women once again find themselves in need of the financial and physical security that men have historically provided.

Hopefully, instead of just taking them back with open arms, the betas will press their advantage and we will see a return to the patriarchy.

It’s true that in China there are many more men than women, but with foreigners there is a sub-market there of foreigners and women interested in dating foreigners. There are alot more women who want to date a foreigner than there is actual foreigners who live there, so you instead have a dating market that is biased in favor of foreign men.

Lady Rain:

You’re thinking only about mail order brides. I’d agree that those cases would be about money. But even in wealthier countries such as Korea and Japan, women will still go for foreign men, even foreign who are not rich or high status such as English teachers.

Who decides who is/not a moron? What about the intelligent but socially inept people? do we sterilize them too? What about the intelligent but not unattractive people? Do you sterilize them? What about the women who are drop dead gorgeous but dumb as a bag of broken crayons, do we sterilize them? Probably not for that last question since too many men will be weak in the knees for a chance to taste what they have.—

Scawy dis talk about sterilizes and things!

And the problem is right here with your pathetic, wailing comment. All worked up with your knickers in a twist about eugenics. What about the poor so and so and who decides… whine, bitch moan, etc… Dishes are done and so are you. You are a great reason why females and others with your soft brains and compassion complexes shouldn’t be allowed to vote. Be happy you’re alive and STFU.

ASDF, very true. Women right now in America don’t need beta males, because there are enough white collar jobs to go around for them. But economic collapse means blue collar will become de facto, and women aren’t good at it. Suddenly lesbians will disappear and those career-minded harpies will rediscover their love of housework for family farmers, auto repair men, and the like.

“Had you read anything I have ever posted you’d already have actual answers to all of those things”
–translation: my bitchy illogical rants are all I have, please don’t use logic on me!

“You also failed to prove how I live off the government since I was never married and never took him to court for anything at all.”
–how did you get your education? How did you get your job? How can you dress like a whore but if a man makes a pass at you at work he’s fired?

You suck on the government’s teat more than your son’s gonna end up sucking another man’s cock just to banish women from hsi life after being raised by a hulking-she-biatch like you.

“I’d STILL get plenty of dating offers.”
—no, you’d get plenty of offers to fuck, because drunk, desperate beats men will fuck harpies when all else fails—if only for one night. But trust me, even they don’t want to be in your bedroom come the morning.

“As for my not being sexually active that has already been discussed as well.”
—Translation: I can’t get a man to listen to my bitching long enough.

We do not need eugenics all we need is to end dysgenic policies. The exists an artificially inflated parasite class engendered entirely by government policy. You don’t have to kill or sterilize anyone.

1. end all child support from the never married/allow men to terminate parental rights on spec if never married to the mother. the sound of legs snapping shut all over the US would be deafening.

if you have a kid together determined by paternity testing the state automatically considers you married for 18 years, FAULT only– the sound of men saying no to sex with whores would be deafening.

2. end all nontemporary, no-behavioral-strings-attached government aid. the behavioral expectations tied to aid should be so hi people would dig ditches before applying for it. weekly drug tests, proof of schooling/job interviews etc, any strings the gov wants to attach

3. no fault divorce should mean the abandoning spouse ABANDONS everything–the house, kids, money. you want to be free? you arent happy? byeeee, with the clothes on your back.

“Retroactively gaming out the last few elections (ignoring, for brevity’s sake, primaries) sans women, we’d have George Bush, arguably the most disastrous president in nearly a century winning twice in landslides and we’d of course have a geriatric shadow of a man as president in John McCain right now.”

I don’t think so. When George W. Bush was president, every other word that came out of the hole under his nose was “compassion,” and I’m pretty sure his handlers weren’t telling him that’s what he had to say to get the male vote. Nope, appearing nice and compassionate is designed to appeal politcially to women, to let suburban soccer mommies know that you’re not really a meany, and that it’s OK to vote for you. Same thing with McCain – he set my teeth on edge every time he’d start talking about the frickin’ illegals being “God’s children.”

The 19th amendment isn’t going to be repealed, and there’s not going to be any laws passed restricting the vote to net taxpayers. The best we can hope for is to make voting somewhat difficult, so that the indifferent and stupid will figure it’s more bother than it’s worth.

Here is a British quasi-government Science publication advocating that Beta’s be denied the legal right to test the paternity of their “children” unless they go through a court first (i.e. criminalizing “secret” paternity testing):

“Che Beta” — Witty, that’s why I started reading this blog in the first place.

Unfortunately, this is more of the typical Roissy bait and switch.

The Bait-
He ruthlessly and accurately states the problem and dangles the solution:

“The realization of the matricentric utopia that feminism has been clamoring for these last few generations will undo the very foundation upon which the rancid ideology was able to prop itself. — Now I will tell you how to save America from this fate. The answer will surprise some of you”

The Switch-
He offers a solution that will only make things worse:

“More PUAs.”

This will not, as he asserts, speed the decline of the Feminazi Sexual Dystopia, it will only prolong it, as the government bailout of GM, simply pushed back bankruptcy for a little longer.

Not that he really wants to help. He’s part of the problem.

Roissy, like all the other PUA masters benefit from the very society that they decry. This doublespeak hypocrisy is right there in this post just waiting for us to read it:

“The big winners are alpha males and the big losers are beta males.”

If Roissy is really an alpha, why would he really want to change a system that benefits him so richly? He doesn’t. Knowing this, Beta males like me, reading this, must look upon any ‘solution’ offered by Roissy very skeptically. And unless he is willing to take one for the team as The Obsidian said he would:

Roissy is going to do whatever he can to advance his own situation, because he too is insulated from the consequences. Not by the government, but by the women who compete for his attention. (They do love their pets!)

Again, I’m not trying to attack Roissy personally, I like his writing and I think learning game can benefit the Beta male, but if they go beyond that, and try to become PUAs…

What do you think will happen first?

Beta men will learn game, get laid, and join Roissy by the pool to watch America circle the drain? Or…

These new legions of PUA’s in training, still competing for the same number of females, will be outflanked by natural alphas like Roissy who are already working on new game moves (that they keep to themselves) while selling us their old material?

More from Roissy:
“Like one of the commenters from yesterday’s post pointed out, the first cute girl to bat her eyelashes at one of these revolutionary Che Betas will have him betraying the brotherhood faster than you can say “just the tip”.”

You’d better hope so boys, because if you’re wrong, (and you are, at least with me) your days are numbered. And when the shit comes down, me and the other Betas will remember who it was busy banging our wives and girlfriends while we slaved away at the office/factory/lab.

“If half the people that got married actually “loved” eachother in a genuine way, they wouldn’t WANT to dick them over and take them for everything they have (whether male or female). So I personally think love is very important in marriage.”

That’s what is funny here….. the double standard: “waaah I don’t want to pay for women!” and “waaaah! I don’t want women to pay for themselves, either”. So which is it? You want to financially support a woman as long as she does whatever you consider “wifely”?

This is a false dichotomy. Most men want a woman who will work when she isn’t raising infants or small children at least and maybe to some degree even if she is, esp. if they can afford child care. However they also want to have the primary breadwinner role and to be respected and valued by their woman IN PART for that reason. Ideally many men would want their wives to be in a light time career path (9 to 5) rather than balls to the wall income maximizing and/or high pressure career advancing mode when infants or small children are not present, and in a more part time job when they’re not.

Note, the woman’s choice can under this model often be significantly more chosen for it’s job satisfaction and / or status attributes rather than income. Examples for e.g. female lawyers would be working for a foundation or even in house in a corporation rather than in a BigLaw or other really hours heavy side of law.

Balance Lady Rain, balance. Rather than extremes of women acting just like men, or women acting like the more extreme examples of female absence from work in history.

On last thing as to the last. Throughout history most women have worked outside of purely domestic tasks. Thev’ve done lighter farm work (gardens, etc.), or cottage industry work, or help in shops or in workshops, etc. Only upper class women, and after the advent of capitalism the bourgeoisie or upper middle class women have for a comparatively brief period of time joined aristo women in typically not working outside the domicile, at least in Western countries.

How can I be the troll when questions are directed at me? Also since I was mentioned by name in his post, it’s hardly “trolling”.

If you consider me what is making “women look bad” you’re a little confused. Yes I see why a woman like myself who works hard and supports herself is so offensive to you. There are plenty of gold-diggers out there if you prefer that type.”

I don’t have any use for gold-diggers. As for why you’re a troll, I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt, because you’re really looking bad here. Its almost as though your entire persona were created to repulse people on here, and convince them of the certainty of their views.

@ASDF, lurker – actually, the blue-collar (typically male) jobs are and have been disappearing faster than white collar ones (where females have equality/advantages). so on current trends, even without a collapse, average male status is sinking faster than female status. roissy is right: there’s no way out of the cul-de-sac except for a highly unlikely “mad max” scenario in which women would depend on men for physical security against other men.

Dave,
While your hypothesis is interesting, I honestly don’t see it playing itself out that way at all; what I see is more likely to happen is that the Betas of the world will simply *not care* if a Woman is getting beaten to within an inch of her life, *by her own boyfriend*. For more on this see Darlymple, etc. That’s where we can see an increase of crimes against Women coming from, and flows nicely w/Roissy’s thoughts above-its something Women, enmasse, as a group mind you, brought on themselves.

True, police and the justice system are tasked w/keeping law and order, but in order for it to work effectively, it has to have a citizenry that actually gives a damn-and more and more, Betas simply aren’t, when it comes to Women enmasse. I’ve already relayed my personal, eyewitness account of attending a Greek Picnic event here in Philly roughly a decade ago; girls were gangbanged/raped in plain sight, outside, in the park, by “Alphas”, while hordes of Betas stood by watching, or perhaps worse(?), turned their back and walked to another area of the park. These Women wrongly assumed that because they had the *right* to cavort scantily clad among Men where alcohol and controlled substances flowed freely and a sexual stench was clearly in the air, they could do so w/o any fear of reprisal. They thought wrong.

A similar incident happened at the annual New York City’s Puerto Rican Day parade, if believe it was either 1999 or 2000; there’s Atlanta’s Freaknik events, similar to Philly’s Greek Picnic where, in years past, similar events have occured; and while such incidents don’t make the news coming out of Cancun and Daytona for the obvious reasons (read, the parties involved tend to be middle to upper middle class White young Men and Women), one can be sure that similar events were and are obtaining, even as we speak.

Although Women enmasse fully expect to take advantage of increased sexual freedoms, and then selecting only the hallowed few Alpha Males of whatever environment they find themselves in, they at the same time still *expect* Beta Males, in the main, to “do the right thing”. That works, if indeed, said Betas have a real shot in the system, meaning a real chance to bed these gals. Barring that though, fuget bout it. And when one applies cold reasoning, who could blame em?

i’m not sure i have a good answer to that. all i can say is that it seems as if human society has been a steady march towards protection of the feminine, and the gentry have done a good job of tying war efforts to protection of women in a way.

men march off to war with pictures of their woman in their pocket. they tell themselves they’re doing it for their country in the name of the woman they love. war, at its most basic, has always been about protection of “what’s ours” for the most part, and nothing has encompassed the phrase “what’s ours” than our women.

beta males have always held value in their worker bee position. they will be best suited when that worker bee function is most fully exploited on a mass scale, and there is no more mass scale than full-on war.

maurice, the jobs disappear because our country’s wealth allows us to outsource them.

however, if the economy continues collapsing, we will no longer be able to afford outsourcing them, and instead they will come back in force.

When everyone can be a lawyer rather than a farmer, most choose lawyer and pay someone else to sweat for them. But if you can’t pay someone to make your food for you—or if food is the only fungible good you have—then everyone buys a farm.

Chuck, don’t forget how many war posters and horror tales from across history pictured “the enemy” raping the good, faithful woman “from back home.” this was incentive to fight harder for the men “from Home” fighting “the enemy.”

The female average in church has been no different than the university classes I’ve seen. It isn’t up to the level of a good club, of course, but that’s just because average looking and ugly girls tend to avoid the clubs, except when they are tagging along with a group of friends.

The greater the sexual market value of a women, the greater the incentive for her to throw of the shackles of restraint in her inborn need to chase alpha cock.

You’ve got it backwards. 6s and 7s have more incentive to be promiscuous.

““Like one of the commenters from yesterday’s post pointed out, the first cute girl to bat her eyelashes at one of these revolutionary Che Betas will have him betraying the brotherhood faster than you can say “just the tip”.”

You’d better hope so boys, because if you’re wrong, (and you are, at least with me) your days are numbered. And when the shit comes down, me and the other Betas will remember who it was busy banging our wives and girlfriends while we slaved away at the office/factory/lab.”

AJ:

i think it was you and i who had that exchange. i of course meant nothing personal by that, but it is true; men will undercut other men in the chase for pussy. i’ve done it to other men, and i’ve had it done to me. it comes in the form of being the “backdoor man”, a hater, a nay-sayer, or a cockblock.

men will always compete (read: undercut) other men in that chase. it is a monolith that our evolved gender has developed upon.

and the truth is, there will never be a mass movement of men to stem that tide. the minute you think you have another man in your corner, fighting the good fight against other men willing to steal your women, *he* will be the one to steal your woman. he will find some flaw in your character or personality and use it against you to fuck that woman.

surely there will be scattered incidents of men going vigilante, and i have no problem with that, but the potential costs do not outweight the benefits of sexual pleasure that drive men in these pursuits.

i admire your goal, but your rationale does not gel with human nature.

Lurker makes a good point, Chuck, and if I may, another point for your consideration:

What would a Beta Male, today, in 2009, have to fight *for*? During WW2, the cause was clear, and the rewards-a blushing bride, either homegrown or a so-called “war bride”, along w/a generous GI Bill, etc.

But today, knowing what we all know, why would such a Man go off to war to fight? Indeed, if current stats are any indication, there are more Jews in American, roughly 3 million or so, than military personnel, if I’m not mistaken. Think about that for a moment. We’re a country of roughly *300 million* people. Most Betas, I suspect, know the deal. It simply ain’t worth it.

Fellas, if I may, let’s be honest, since this is the space where “pretty lies perish”-Pussy is a Powerful Motivator. And when that’s taken off the table, most guys simply won’t give a damn.

maurice but I’d like to know about any kind of trend of males “going galt” (so to speak) and withdrawing their participation from a society that undervalues them and their prerogatives

Well Maurice, we can look at the extended adolescence that a number of young American men are currently enjoying/suffering through? We can also look at the random violent acts by young men like the Virginia Tec killer Choi or the young man(there are many) who let loose inside of mall killing a number of people last year or the year before.

Dr. Phil(oh brother) had a show about the young man. What a sad life that little boy lived. He was molested twice not once but two times as a kid. He didn’t live with his mother often as a child. He went from house to house. IIRC his father wasn’t in his life much as a kid. He was bullied at school. The straw that broke the camel’s back was when his girlfriend broke up with him. He left a note apologizing to his “family” for what he was about to do. IIRC, he said but now I will be famous or something along those lines.

lurker When everyone can be a lawyer rather than a farmer, most choose lawyer and pay someone else to sweat for them.
I think I posted a link some time ago about lawyers( those who do the grunt work) being outsourced to India.

Isn’t there a lot of exaggeration about the degree of forced celibacy among beta males in their 20s and 30s these days?

It seems to me that Roissy and other PUA’s exaggerate it greatly. In part it’s an unconscious as well as conscious desire to make the important of their game message that much greater. As well they point out trends which I agree are present, but then make it sound sometimes that extreme beta pussy deprivation is already upon us. Is that really true.

I get it that omegas (which is what David Alexander really is, even if he shouldn’t be, and infact a lesser omega) aren’t getting any, practically. (Well even he did once.)

I get it that betas aren’t scoring in the metro bar scenes anymore, or hardly ever at least with a 6 or up — whereas a few decades ago higher betas sometimes could, at least in some of such bar scenes.

But can they really not find reasonably attractive girlfriends outside of the bar scene, after dry spells lasting yeah maybe six months or a year?

In other words, I get it that the rate of scoring of solid alphas and even lesser alphas has gone up huge what with all the feminist believing smart sluts as well as other kinds of that have always been there sluts. I get it that higher betas aren’t doing nearly as well on that front as they did back in the 70s and early 80’s (which were still sexually the 70s until about 83).

In other words isn’t this mostly a case of the sexually rich (alpha males) getting obscenely rich, rather than the sexually poorer betas getting a lot poorer.

As I’ve said many times before, the group I feel that is most important to worry about in terms of beta deprivation are the higher betas who are that importantly because of wider society status and income. They matter to society huge and to not adequately sexually reward them is a big problem.

If omegas and even lesser betas can’t get laid, is that such a tragedy — except for the really brainy nerd lesser betas who I do want to get a decent looking but probably mostly smart and also kinda nerdy wife.

Anyone have any numbers? Anyone want to talk about all the guys they personally know and how it seems to shake out among them?

“Roissy Maxim #66: The worst thing to happen to America was women’s suffrage.”

Before studying game I heard a naturally Alpha friend say this and thought he had lost it. How terrible, how primitive, how backwards of him. Didn’t he learn about EQUALITY?

Since studying game I realize just how true this maxim is. If I could make one change to the U.S. Constitution, I would repeal the 19th Amendment completely and forever. Female voting has done more damage to our Republic than the little snowflakes could ever imagine.

Re: Obama’s unsustainable debt

While I’ve had my illusions about the nature of women, I’ve never had illusions about the Federal debt. We are nearing the end of Federal deficit spending, which should not have been allowed outside of war. (Real wars, like WWII.) And the collapse which will end it will not be pretty. The Federal government is in a corner. The two ways out: print money and collapse the value of the dollar, making it impossible for Americans to purchase the foreign energy they depend on. Or slash the Federal government…ALL OF IT…in half overnight. That’s military, Social Security, Medicare, everything, half of employees fired by morning, half of the budget gone, all checks sent out by the government cut in half.

Either one will shock and collapse our economy and take the world down with it. The former, which Obama is just stupid enough to try, could result in massive disruptions of the food supply since America is such a large component of global food production, and America’s food production absolutely depends on foreign oil. (Thanks to all the girls and their herb boytoys for voting to “save the Earth” and stop evil oil companies from drilling in America.)

These are the kinds of things that lead to war. Speaking of which, I have a sneaking suspicion that North Korea is preparing for one. They are probably correctly guessing that we can’t afford to fight them conventionally, and that Obama is too much of a pussy to nuke them. Hope South Korea can hold their own because if that’s what Kim Jong is thinking, he’s right on both accounts.

The world is in serious danger. And most of the mistakes that led us here can be traced back to women being involved in politics and the feminization of western men, specifically America’s men.

Maurice: Lurker has a point about blue vs. white collar jobs. It will be a lot easier to get manufacturing back to the States than it will be to come up with the money to keep female bureaucrats, yoga instructors, flower arrangers, event planners etc in business. They actually tried that, and it was called credit bubbles 1 and 2. Is not sustainable.

As far as the Mad Max scenario goes, I think it’s coming at some point. When municipal and state governments can no longer afford to pay police, it will be every man for himself. Men will learn to take care of themselves again, and women will come to rely on them for it.

BTW, I don’t hate women at all. But I understand now why, in the world created by our ancestors, women took care of the family and the social structure while men took care of the government and the civilization.

Our natures are what they are. Pretending we’re not different or better suited to different tasks in a society is suicide. As is pretending we won’t destroy ourselves with the absolute freedom (sexual or otherwise) that we crave.

Women should not be in the position they’re in right now. And men should not be acting like women on so many of the important questions of the day.

One other note: my comment “Real wars, like WWII” was not ment as a slight to anyone who has served in Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf, etc. Rather I only wish to distinguish between wars that the Republic must borrow money for, and military actions that a Congress might label ‘war’ for the express purpose of borrowing and wasting money.

Another: You’ve got it backwards. 6s and 7s have more incentive to be promiscuous.

Paging El Guapo.

That’s my experience. It’s also what Roissy said in a comment response to a direct question of mine to him about 20 somethings today. Though it can maybe be extended less so to 8’s also.

What tends to happen with 8s-10s I think is that they can attract stable alphas who are really into them and not total douches. As well they get TONs of attractive alpha male attention without having to put out to back up their responding to flirting.

That’s not to say that 9’s and 8’s don’t fall fast and easy sometimes to someone that REALLY hits them hard with seduction in just the right way and clicks right with them (often playfully but really dominantly), especially if they are in an especially receptive emotional state for that at the time.

As for 10’s, I can’t honestly say I’ve ever done a clear 10. (I’ve done lots of 10’s by the standards of some/many who post pics on the female photos page here.)

Right you are. Cooperation among men is always in constant conflict against competition among men, and there’s no greater incentive for competition than the non-zero sum prize of exclusive, high-value female sexuality.

Only extremely strong affinities and formalized allegiances among men will marginally deter such undercutting, much more than the prospect of violence. Total strangers though? Game on, and whether the “best man” wins is irrelevant.

Expecting that other men won’t try to fuck your woman because you have high ethical standards and wouldn’t fuck theirs is foolish — your average dude is going to dislike you for even imagining fucking his woman anyway, so may as well go for broke.

After all, a good percentage of very hot women one encounters are going to be “locked up” in an early, ill-advised marriage and/or LT relationships and your penis will not care.

Surprisingly, your good reputation amongst other chicks won’t suffer, despite bedding married/taken women. They’d never admit it, but the scofflaw free-ranger who’s indifferent to a couple’s marriage vows and doesn’t let the potential for violent retribution stop him is a sincere turn on, and they’re suckers for the gossip-drama to boot.

The article about why single motherhood on the rise is really interesting.

“We now have a situation in which large numbers of men are alienated from family life and from the next generation. And that’s hardly “feminist,” at least if feminism means the equality of women and men not only in public life but at home.”

So true. While there are a few parts of feminism that I agree with, the part about how “single motherhood is an essential part of female autonomy” is definitely not one of them. Of course it is at times unavoidable, but I don’t feel like it should ever be a first choice.

It is important to have a male and female influence in a child’s life, and in some cases this does have to be carried out by a father/mother figure who the biological parent is not romantically involved with (i.e. gay/lesbian couples), but I feel like a straight man or woman should be doing their best to make sure that their child is raised in a family with a mother and a father, preferably through marriage.

doug1, what about all the men who father children with no desire or means to raise them?

Overwhelmingly the responsibility there relies on the women who fuck those exciting losers.

I used to buy the feminist / chivalrous crap that it’s the male who should be blamed. It’s not that I approve of them. It’s that effective shaming and negative consequences has always been primarily on the woman — when it is effective.

That’s because as Roissy, all of Evo Psych, and other PUAs constantly point out, to very wide agreement, women are the gatekeepers of human intercourse. Absent rape or strong coercion that’s true. It’s certainly true in America today.

In other and simpler words:

It’s the slutty single mother’s fault. They should be following every mother’s and even more every father’s advice on who and when to fuck. Or at least a lot more so. Or at the very least use effective birth control, also almost all under her control.

As well, the more I’ve learned the more I’ve become convinced that most single mothers who get pregnant also wanted to consciously or subconsciously these days.

lurker wroteMike, go get her.
SMDH
Lurker, please stop. You are not in a street fight. I bet you are as worked up as a prize fighter before a match . To encourage another man to give a woman a beat down, even a virtual one is ubber omega, you are better than that.

Seeking alpha Utopia for Asian-obsessed betas until ‘empowered’ Chinese women learn the power of the cuckold.
That’s all I’ve got
Seeking alpha, you really don’t think women the 3 billion women of the world er dream of pulling one over on the 2.7 billion men(30 million are true alphas) of the world so you?

To late for romance I do not volunteer and I have no problems leaving any country to live somewhere else once I get enough money. Give me some good reasons to please. Seriously.

1.Who says the country(s) you dream of moving to would want you. Once the US falls you will have all of the trouble moving about the world as any third world immigrant who seeks to enter a first world country. You may also find yourself on the receiving end of some taunting when the US collapses.

2. Can you speak a foreign language fluently without an e identifiable American accent?

3. How often do you eat foreign food. Bubble guts are not a joke.

4. If you have ancestor who made their way via Ellis island and the hell like conditions that some endured to make it here, do you really have to ask that question.

5.Only chumps pack up and get going when times get a bit difficult. You would become the real life cliché of the guy who loses his job and goes out for a pack of cigarettes.

“men will always compete (read: undercut) other men in that chase. it is a monolith that our evolved gender has developed upon.”

Single men have, and will, always exhibit this behavior because they are naturally in competition for a woman. Once they get married, that should stop, or at the very least, if they get caught ‘stepping out’ they should face sanctions from church, family, community, law (you pick it.) That’s how it used to be.

If you’re happily married to a woman who meets your needs, only a fool would intentionally do something to fuck it up. Yeah alpha guys had affairs anyway, but they enjoyed the risk of rolling the dice when they might lose everything.

Those consequences don’t exist anymore. That dickhead with 8 kids, cheated on his wife and got exposed on nationwide tv. No big deal. Sanctions, NOT forthcoming.

I’ve said it before, if you can’t confine yourself to just 1 good woman, you’re not a man, but a greedy child.

Sure, there is a scarcity of good women who even want to try and meet our needs, but changing that facet of our culture will involve restricting not only the women’s choices, but the alphas as well. Just like women enjoy the freedom a lack of shame brings, so do alphas.

If Roissy got his ass beat every time he fucked one of our girlfriends/wives, he would stop doing it, no matter how much they wanted him to.

“i admire your goal, but your rationale does not gel with human nature.”

“Roissy Maxim #66: The worst thing to happen to America was women’s suffrage.”

Before studying game I heard a naturally Alpha friend say this and thought he had lost it. How terrible, how primitive, how backwards of him. Didn’t he learn about EQUALITY?

Since studying game I realize just how true this maxim is. If I could make one change to the U.S. Constitution, I would repeal the 19th Amendment completely and forever. Female voting has done more damage to our Republic than the little snowflakes could ever imagine.

I’ve had a similar journey. I haven’t yet quite gotten to where are yet, but I’m certainly torn. Also I’d lay the “blame” for my epiphany on that entirely on Roissy’s. That is, what he himself says here mostly, but also on some commenters here.

@ASDF/lurker- uh, no. the only thing that will stop outsoucrng of manufacturing is the return of trade barriers – the opposite of conventional wisdom. the only other factor, that we saw a bit of when oil prices spiked last year, would be if the costs of transportation suddenly were non-zero – whether through fuel costs or lack of security such as the piracy near Somalia.

either way, imported goods must be *more* expensive, not less, then domestic goods for a market-based system to favor domestic manufacturing. and since overseas manufacturing in China is so much cheaper, there would have to be a hell of an import tariff to counter that. the U.S. is the world’ largest trading country, and we have important trade relations with every part of the world (i.e., not just within one region or bloc) so we have the most to lose from a 30s-style global trade war. but i think tariffs could be raised in some areas to protect key industires – the reason they have not been, in my view, is that the capitalist shareholding class has always been against it because (as with immigration restrictions) it would raise costs and lower corporate profits.

This crash is fake. The banks and credit card companies are deliberately, and with almost insane aggressiveness, sucking credit out of the economy. Thomas Jefferson understood the stunts these blameless bankers play, as did Andrew Jackson.

They are creating a crisis for Obama the Fake to ‘solve’. They hope this will give Obama the Fake, ‘cred’.

Act accordingly.

Of course, there really will be some serious stuff happening within the next two years.

I also think it’s pretty unfair to blame women’s suffrage for the US’s problems, especially if you’re using that in its most literal sense. Women aren’t the only ones who vote for candidates who make “bad” decisions, men are voting for the same candidates.

If you’re using it to say that women’s suffrage ruined the US because it opened the door even wider for women’s rights, then that’s your opinion which I won’t argue against (even though I disagree) because it won’t really matter what I say.

***Here is a less dystopian view**:
Artifical wombs, cloned eggs (with Grade-A genes, pun intended), and caretaker robots will allow men and women to have their “own” families without needing each other. They will each concieve children that no court or opposing spouse can take away from them. Children of your very own, without the baggage of a nagging spouse.

Successful Beta guys (doctors, lawyers, business owners) used to marry 9’s and 10’s.

They were guys that busted their ass all day, and came home to the hot wife and a big house.

Now that same level woman fucks a MMA fighter, rockstar, or some other tattooed freak, hoping he will marry her. And everybody else moves down the ladder 1 rung. That leaves what you’d call lesser betas out in the cold because they’re smart enough to believe they deserve something better than a 4-6, but often can’t close the deal, so they end up celibate.

I don’t know if PUA’s exaggerate it, but they’re sure happy it happens.

@DOBA – very interesting point re tatoos and piercings. i never thought of it that way before. markers of a more primitive society .. hmmm….

@Thursday – Monica Bellucci is past her prime. i recently rented an action flick. “shoot ’em up”, in which she is the female lead opposite clive owen. even with all the movie makeup and magic, she looks middle aged now, in a way she didn’t in the matrix movie.

also concur that there are a surprising number of beta men that have *no* appeal to women and *no* idea how to interact with them. shocking to think about it, actually.

these are the men that in previous generations would have been married off to the town 3s and 4s and been happy to have them. today, those 3s and 4s think they’re 6s or 7s and reject the uber-betas out of an entitled princess complex. they think their value to men is *way* higher than it really is, and, being women, they want, but will never get, the successful alphas that will eventually take the 8s and 9s. then they wonder why they’re unhappy cat ladies when they’re 40, husbandless and childless.

@DT, doug – i actually wouldn’t go that far. although it’s true that women vote in higher numbers for the welfare state (Dems) and men for the opposite. it’s a pointless discussion because the franchise will never be rolled back …

Ok I see the point that the others are making about how LR may be a Troll. No one is discussing Roissy’s post. We are all discussing LR’s failed relationship with her baby-daddy. It’s like the whole thread turned into the Lifetime Channel for Women. So that’s how it is done. Brilliant.

You still haven’t provided a reason why he hit you. Other than he was drunk. You 2 were together for a WHOLE year, surely you must know something about his personality other than “he flipped out and became Mr. Hyde” one night while drinking.

Keep in mind though, I don’t really care about your situation. Nor do I “desperately want a reason for why he’d act like that.” If you died by some unfortunate accident today, I wouldn’t really care.

Its just funny to see you skirt around various issues and rampage on others.

I usually leave the bar/club just after 12-1230, but I was out until close on Saturday. Anyway, the past few times I have been out that late, I have been opened by women. This followed by a barrage of shit tests on the slightest pretext. And if you fail happen to any of the tests, the girls would get really fucking mean. This seems to happen a lot as I am walking up to the bar where the girl is standing. The girls are always at least somewhat buzzed, but not necessarily drunk. It only seems to happen at clubs not bars.

So, if women are out and they are horny and they haven’t been satisfied with calibre of the guys who have been hitting on them, do they just start opening any good looking guy who happens to be standing a couple feet from them? And then throw out a bunch of shit tests to quickly see what he is made of? I wasn’t having a particularly good night, in fact, I hadn’t been out in a while and my game was pretty shitty, but I was talking to people.

these are the men that in previous generations would have been married off to the town 3s and 4s and been happy to have them

We sub-human males found porn, learned how to do our own laundry, cook our own food, and extract friendship from women without the responsibility of having to take care of her. In turn, women discovered that they have brains, and the ability to earn their own income which frees men from working hard in exchange for the big piece of chicken and a heart attack at the age of 60. So fuck you to whoever thinks taking away women’s ability to earn middle class wages solves the problem.

Sigh. What I was hinting towards, and what your thick skull cannot obviously comprehend, is that I ponder what type of relationship you had.

It was approx 1 year long. Was it smooth sailing? Rocky? Arguments? Did you 2 fight every weekend? Never? Did he bestow miles of gifts on you? Or just a bag of skittles and a pearl necklace? Was it candy pie and plum fairies up until 8 months into your pregnancy, then he turned rampant and beat your ass (which, to me, is the picture you are painting)?

Just because you describe the circumstances of one night (or 2), doesn’t mean you really divulge the entire story of your relationship. Or as i put it, the reason.

Honestly, if you treated him with the same amount of disdain and audacity you do the readers on this blog…after a year of it, i’d probably beat your ass, too.

I wonder then, how bad the fights were? Who initiated? What were the topics? Big issues (finances, baby)? Small issues (didn’t put the seat down, dishes not washed)?

Verbal abuse is a precursor to physical, by the way. Nor does there need to be cheating at all.

Anyway, judging by your story I think you’re just to blame for the situation as is your deadbeat-ex-husband. You just rationalized it the way you wish to see it. We all know what women say rarely equals to what they think/want/do.

ALSO, i highly doubt he never drank alcohol before the baby was on its way. I wonder what caused him to drink so heavily?

You so quickly disregard your husband as a result of just 2 moments of physical abuse. Yet women tend to stand by their mate for years of the same thing. Makes me think something was wrong before it happened. Or someone wanted out. Hmm…

maurice: I’m going to ask you specifically since you seem to Get It, how is more PUAs a solution or anything other than ‘Hasten the end, my people!’?

LR: Hey, hugs. I’d eviscerate him bloody (or at least draw blood) if it was the child, not simply just leave. It goes two ways and where children are concerned, it’s no joke. From evidence such as siestas and the reasons for them, the idea you get into your head as soon as you spoke of a father for your child, the fear of comitted relationships: I think you’re letting the fear of it happening again influence your life too much, though. Afraid of wanting sex, afraid of men, possibly afraid of your judgement, afraid of genuinely trusting him to care for the kid, all that. Not sure if you want to keep having to talk about this in a hostile environment, though.

The reason suffrage should have happened is because of the men who are asses, who are responsible for the women and screw it up. Which is valid and exactly why women’s choice is important. I think it’s laughable on both sides to say you can figure out what a person’s going to be 100%, all the time, with you. Otherwise the betas wouldn’t be so damn surprised when they get screwed over, nor would the women who do either. Both genders can get attracted for The Wrong Reasons. Some sociocultural factors come into play into Why People Are Stupid About Each Other but a lot of the time, isn’t it naive to think that most people are good people inside? Does anyone particularly ascribe to that theory?

I love the freedom a Western model gives women, accepting part and parcel of freedom is that it gets misused. Invariably. It’s actually kind of optimistic and non-misanthropic to try and blame only one gender for the World As Screwed Up. If the crazy theories here are true, I’ll hopefully have a surplus of kids to acheive the ideal synthesis which doesn’t involve apocalypse and risk of having to put up with abuse. Something that doesn’t involve taking away women’s choice so much. Though probably another laughable idea is that voting gives you power.

And that’s my pessimistic input.

The precise reason why political discussion can be a turn off for women is probably this: the name for the tone politics invariably has these days? ‘impotent’.

“Overwhelmingly the responsibility there relies on the women who fuck those exciting losers.”

yes, the ultimate responsiblity falls on the shoulders of the woman. actually, i should say, the ultimate *burden* falls on her shoulders as she’s the one most likely strapped with the children.

but the problem is one of asymmetric information. a man, in his quest for pussy, will assume the role of whatever he has to assume in order to get laid. the “red queen” will be in effect though, as women slowly adapt to this imperfect information.

the problem at hand, for men, and the cause of their angst, is their decline *relative* to alpha men. this beta male movement type thing is the same battle cry of class warriors. they want egalitarianism when men and women aren’t equipped to desire one another in a uniform fashion. similarly, class warriors call for equality of outcome in economic terms, but people aren’t equipped with the natural resources to meet that goal.

for example: blacks today are better off in absolute terms than whites in recent decades. most have TVs, cell phones, cars etc, yet they are angry about their situation because they aren’t keeping up with the joneses.

Of course that doesn’t tell us anything about how many sex partners men and women are having before they marry, but it does appear that marriage is very much still a big player, as is divorce, for most men and women alike.

Show me a Russian woman married to a beta American guy in the US and I’ll show you a woman who is getting banged on the side by a Russian guy
Trust me, I know

UH huh, remember what I said earlier folks remember. Foreign men ain’t having you taking their women. Whiskey is right, men will fight over poon.

A.J travis I’ve said it before, if you can’t confine yourself to just 1 good woman, you’re not a man, but a greedy child.
For this^^^ I have a ton of respect for you. If only more men were like you and whiskey.

If Roissy got his ass beat every time he fucked one of our girlfriends/wives, he would stop doing it, no matter how much they wanted him to
Agreed, it’s the cosigning by others that allows BS like this and single motherhood (with multiple children) to go on.

“I used to buy the feminist / chivalrous crap that it’s the male who should be blamed. It’s not that I approve of them. It’s that effective shaming and negative consequences has always been primarily on the woman — when it is effective.

That’s because as Roissy, all of Evo Psych, and other PUAs constantly point out, to very wide agreement, women are the gatekeepers of human intercourse. Absent rape or strong coercion that’s true. It’s certainly true in America today.”

@Doug —

Very true. The feminists who were irked the most by the sexual double standard, which was an effective way of reigning in sexual immorality, were the ones who wanted the sexual freedom they perceived men to have: that is, to have what Erica Jong referred to as the “zipless fuck” without being slut-shamed. In other words, the women who were inclined to be slutty wanted this to go away so that they could be as slutty as they liked.

For the rest of the female sex who does not want to be slutty, the disappearance of the double standard worked against them. Why? Because the sluts were now out in the open and putting out sex to beat the band. This lowered the price of sex for the most sexually desirable men, and left women who didn’t want to put out sexually in a much less competitive position to win the attention of these men.

The price of sex *increased* for men of higher beta and below status. It *decreased* a lot for alphas, even lesser ones. It freed up women who wanted to be slutty to deploy sex as a means of getting access to alphas, but at the same time foreclosed access to the same alphas to women who are not willing to put sex on the table.

“Once they get married, that should stop, or at the very least, if they get caught ’stepping out’ they should face sanctions from church, family, community, law (you pick it.) That’s how it used to be.”

that’s yet another case of society trying to constrict alpha male activity for the sake of egalitarian outcomes in mating and courtship. its a grand idea, but some non-conformist activity *has* to be expected. men are programmed to want sex. their programming is difficult to disrupt by social confines like marriage. the more testosterone, the more alpha, the more difficult these urges are to curb.

“That dickhead with 8 kids, cheated on his wife and got exposed on nationwide tv. No big deal. Sanctions, NOT forthcoming.”

i watched that show once. i glanced at the shrike’s body posture and domineering personality and knew right then and there that she was the cause of all the problems in that relationship. you haven’t read “people” apparently because she was fucking her bodyguard if not before, while her husband was supposedly hanging out with other women.

“If Roissy got his ass beat every time he fucked one of our girlfriends/wives, he would stop doing it, no matter how much they wanted him to.”

wouldn’t happen. beta men will appease their woman before fighting and/or harming the sneaky fucker. and he will fall for it. if he doesn’t, she’ll break up with him and find a beta male that will tacitly agree.

plus, alpha males would merely adapt to the beta male’s investigative tactics to discover the affair. on the whole, if betas are smart and innovative, alphas are likely to be moreso. hunter versus hunted.

1. In all likelihood, there will be a 5th (and 6th) technological innovation which screws up your prediction.

2. That said, your prediction is 180 degrees incorrect, for reasons which I will explain in a few posts. But first, a riddle:

There is a town in America with the highest rate of poverty; the highest rate of food stamp use; an extremely high birth rate; and the youngest average age. In this town, the vast majority of residents do not speak English at home and 40% of the adult population speaks English not at all.

This whole business about shaming as an effective social control really only works in the presence of an actual community– the kind you live your whole life in, the kind that knows your business whether you want it known or not, the kind you can’t really escape or “reinvent” yourself away from.

Successful Beta guys (doctors, lawyers, business owners) used to marry 9’s and 10’s.

7’s to occasionally 9’s but more often 7’s or 8’s in my wizzened observation of days of somewhat old. Unless we’re talking about a guy then who was an alpha or lesser alpha in attractiveness. Or unless we’re talking clear multi millions and the usual considerable power and dynamic alpha personality that goes with it. Lesser alpha anyway, if not so smooth with the chicks.

@puma- who would mother such children. Humans are a breed of animals who can have children and move on after the eggs are hatched. It takes at the bare minimum 10-13 years before a child can stand on its’ own in the real world.

@doug- If default cheats can I slap him? What if he gives me HPV from one of his women, is it okay to slap him then?

I wonder if Chick Noir would still “respect” me if I stated the other half of the truth:
If we beat the shit out of every wife/girlfriend who fucked around on us (consequences be damned) they’d stop doing it too, even if Roissy got them REALLY wet.
It’s one of the reasons they rarely cheat on their psycho alpha boyfriends/husbands.

Chuck-
Successful societies DO constrict alpha male and all female sexual behavior for the benefit of the Beta male. The shit-storm we are in now, is the result of those chains being lifted.

“wouldn’t happen. beta men will appease their woman before fighting and/or harming the sneaky fucker.”

It doesn’t happen much now, because most Betas believe that they can employ the same tactics they used in college and fins another girlfriend/wife so why go postal, but as Betas like me get pushed closer to the edge, and realize that the next woman may never come, we won’t have anything left to lose or fear.

“plus, alpha males would merely adapt to the beta male’s investigative tactics to discover the affair. on the whole, if betas are smart and innovative, alphas are likely to be moreso. hunter versus hunted.”

Doubtful, alpha males are generally lower in intelligence than Betas (higher intelligence = lower testosterone) plus alphas don’t adapt to betas they adapt to women. If alphas could ultimately out-think Betas in other things besides pussy, we’d all be speaking German, Japanese or Arabic now.

Show me a Russian woman married to a beta American guy in the US and I’ll show you a woman who is getting banged on the side by a Russian guy.

Trust me, I know.

Even if he’s a higher beta in terms of his pickup game, but a strong manly type who has some relationship game, good not fabulous, but isn’t a wimp and doesn’t role over for her, and attends well to the bedroom, without being a super stud?

I.e. I’m asking about a guy who is NOT pussified and in that respect your version of an expanded field of alphas of the older school variety.

doug, if bhetti slaps you and you want to call the police to have her arrested, you can do so. If the cops come in and see a bruise on you, they will cart your lovely bhetti to jail with the rest of them. Now maybe this varies from state to state but I’ve seen police lock women up for domestic battery.

aj Davis If we beat the shit out of every wife/girlfriend who fucked around on us (consequences be damned) they’d stop doing it too, even if Roissy got them REALLY wet.
Or they choose to avoid men.

It’s one of the reasons they rarely cheat on their psycho alpha boyfriends/husbands

Even these men are cheated on if the woman has some free time on her hands, his friends decides to muscle in, and she is that type. Anyway, why would you want to live in a house where everyone is walking on eggshells. It’s one thing for your family to know that your boss, but something else entirely to have them walking around in fear of pops going postal.

A.J davis, rockstars(those with money) are alpha too. Any man with money is an alpha because he could get a “10” to marry him, maybe not love him but marry him and put out yes. That leaves what you’d call lesser betas out in the cold because they’re smart enough to believe they deserve something better than a 4-6
Entitlement much???
NO one deserves a “ten” or a billionaire just because they want one. In your life, there have been women who liked you, yet you wouldn’t give them the time of day because you didn’t want them. Well the same thing happens with the “lesser beta”. but often can’t close the deal, so they end up celibate.

Then it’s lesser beta’s own fault, sometimes we must make lemonnaide out of lemons. The unemployed contractor with little savings is an idiot if he turns down a 20 per hr job because it could get 40per hr for the same job two years ago.

The man who makes your panties wet in the club is NEVER the man who will make the best husband or Father for your kids. The ones that would, are probably ‘staring’ at you in that ‘creepy’ way that women hate.

If you’re looking for a good man, talk to that ‘nice’ guy, wearing unfashionable clothes, who’s behind you in line at the supermarket, or reading computer shopper at Barnes & Noble.

Tunisia, Algeria, and Iran’s birthrates are all down to roughly 1.7 or so last I saw.

The “replacement” birthrate is 2.1.

These economies are going to ineveitably contract badly in about 20-30 years when way too many retirees are straddling the system like welfare bums, with too few workers to support them.

Note for all women in this thread: Latinas that speak english and can type will be entering the pink work force in this decade. The daughters of the day maids will work cheaper than you, can operate the fax machine and the printer, and can type. They will be severely lowering your pay by making it stagnate.

The biggest game-changer on the horizon will be artifical wombs (already birthing mice and rats in experiments). When men can have kids without women, they wont even try to marry them anymore, and women will truly be cast adrift into a world of endless-pump-n’-dumps. In fact, since so many women cannot afford kids on their own, I see a future in which about half the kids raised wont have a mom. A sexbot and kids that are “his” entirely, and cannot be taken away by a court, and a life of trawling bars and picking up random women with game is surely going to be preferable to being stuck in a marriage that could financially wreck him at any time, while straddled to a bitch who complains and criticizes him constantly.

I predict the coastal areas with be majority non-white in about 20 more years and the interior of America will be filled with many Jesus-freaks who pretty much have 2 kids each and keep their heads down. These people aren’t noticeable because they aren’t on TV, but they will be there………chugging away at their little churches. Its the D.C.’s and New York’s and Baltimore’s and LAs’ and Seattle’s and Miami’s that are going to be quite foreign places in 20 years. Whiskey has a blog post about how radio stations in LA are going hispanic now and indie rock stations are going out of business. There aren’t enough white kids there to listen to alterna-music anymore in those areas, their parents only made one kid each if they made any at all. There were more young white people 20 years ago in these places than there are now. The generations of them are getting smaller. Their cultural “dominance” will fade into obscurity as they get outnumbered in the clubs……………………………….but where are they going to go? The heartland is filled with Jesus freaks and there are relatively few bars (because most people are in churches instead), so living in Missouri or Kansas would be very boring to such people. I think they will simply shrink into utter obscurity by mid-century in these areas on the social scene.

By the way………………………for the stupid, and we have a few here. A birthrate of 1.0 (which a few cities on this earth are actually down to) means that each woman only has one child, simply replacing herself…………..but not the father. If there were 200 adults, half male and half female, this means only 100 babies were born. If this set of babies does it again…………………..you only get 50 babies in the next generation. You get to 25, then 12, 6, 3. It doesn’t take long for a civilization to die out. Thats what -REALLY- happened with Sparta. There were only roughly a 1000 Spartan citizens left when she finally toppled. The rest of the world was growing, but she was shrinking. She got overwhelmed. The late-age Greeks complained about the Romans overwhelming her with their births more than battlefield prowess. The same thing happened with Rome vs. the northern barbarian tribes that toppled her. Its the same story, women got wealthier, delayed childbirth, birthrate got under about 1.8 for a few consecutive generations………….then there was a shortage of young capable men, and the place couldn’t defend itself. Augustus was complaining about the low birthrate of the nobility in his day……………..and later, even with her advantages, Rome fell to illiterate barbarians who didn’t even appreciate art.

Even if he’s a higher beta in terms of his pickup game, but a strong manly type who has some relationship game, good not fabulous, but isn’t a wimp and doesn’t roll over for her, and attends well to the bedroom, without being a super stud?

Doug, unfortunatley, you’d be surprised by how many guys today don’t measure up to your reasonable description of a regular guy above.

Foreign brides are also pre-selected as mercenaries.

I’m not proud of it now (OK, I am certainly not ashamed: those dudes were poachers in my woods) — but I slept with one Polish girl who was engaged to an American guy two days before they got married. She was what Clio would dub an Alpha Female, and she was mercenary like hell.

I also did TONS of sex talk by phone with Polish women married to Dutch, German, English, or American guys. It became almost an addiction. It really was fun and addictive: I’d meet her online on I.M., we;’ chat briefly, exchange photos, and more often than not talk dirty on the phone withn a week. Real dirty, to mutual masturbation. Some of these grils had beautiful voices.

This was while I was still single and dating real-life girls as well, mind you.

But what it illustrates is that women who marry outside of their culture make a huge tradeoff, and unless (1) the guys’ got tons of dough and life is a carefree fun ride, (2) or is an exceptionally sexy guy, or (3) they are one of those rare perfect-matches, (4) or she is a very pragmatic type who couldn’t care less about impractical things, she’s gonna pine for the sound of her own language whispering dirty words in her ear.

And Polish girls are supposed to be the good ones! don’t even get me started about Russian girls.

But what it illustrates is that women who marry outside of their culture make a huge tradeoff, and unless (1) the guys’ got tons of dough and life is a carefree fun ride, (2) or is an exceptionally sexy guy, or (3) they are one of those rare perfect-matches, (4) or she is a very pragmatic type who couldn’t care less about impractical things, she’s gonna pine for the sound of her own language whispering dirty words in her ear.

It doesn’t illustrate that about girls who marry outside of their culture in general, just about the specific cultures you mention. For example certain cultures of Asian girls will often lower their standards to date a nonAsian guy. What you say is definitely more common scenario but not universal though.

You also contradicted yourself that I should have seen the warning signs and left before all of that, but then you chastise me in the next sentence for leaving after “just two” abuse incidents?!

I never said that you should have left prior to the abuse. I said I’m 100% certain there were events leading up to the abuse that were quite obvious the relationship was on that path. Nor did I chastise you for leaving after 2 incidents. Its an observation I made regarding the typical DV case and yours in particular. You’re making a lot of assumptions about my judgments on you.

You also further try to imply in as many ways as you can that it’s my fault he hit me. I’d agree if I had hit him first… or EVER. A grown adult is responsible for their own actions, so if he chose to “hit” that is HIS issue not mine.

Sadly, Lady, its both your faults.

You also further accuse me of “blaming it all on him”. Blame what? The abuse? Of course it’s his fault.

You sure seem to be. I’m providing counter-argument that maybe the relationship was heading to that point anyway (the abuse), and both of you had a part in that.

You also heavily imply that no matter what I say, I’m making the whole thing up because I wanted out? What would be my ulterior motive since I never went after child support and wasn’t married to him (therefore no alimony issues)?

Funny you bring that up. You’ve stated many times here you wanted a child. A woman…wanting a child? What an unheard of ulterior motive!

So now I’m also an evil woman for leaving an abuser for good instead of just leaving and going back repeatedly like a lot of women do????

I never said you were evil.

Is there any answer here that won’t make me wrong in your eyes, because you’ve offered every single way that I am at fault for HIS alcoholism, HIS abusive nature, and everything involving our relationship. Like you said, a man doesn’t “suddenly” become abusive so by your logic he was an abuser long before he met me. You are clearly not looking for a real answer here… just a way to blame me for the whole thing and for his entire psychological make-up. Very rational.

I offered you ways that its not just his fault…which you are so content at sharing with the denizens of this great blog. Very freely, i might add. You might want to reevaluate what happened in your life and stop blaming the father, before you bestow some misplaced hate in the male race in your son.

A.J. Travis: I’m pretty sure chic noir doesn’t do that on purpose and a knowledgeable person would assume dyslexia, especially since she has constant difficulty with new names.

‘You can’t spell, therefore you are unworthy of The Greatness.’ Even though chic’s just recently posted what she thought were hot betas somewhere else. She looks like a likely convert. If you use that as a standard, you are basically going to get nowhere with your revolution. You need to preach to those who know no better, rather than the intellectuals, because they’re the ones most likely to follow you and blindly.

You as beta and/or nice? Currently looking like bull. You’d be a psychopathic killer of all men you viewed as sexually successful if there weren’t any social restrictions on you, probably assuming they slept with a married woman at some time, somewhere.

Chic:

doug, if bhetti slaps you and you want to call the police to have her arrested, you can do so.

VERY difficult to imagine. I think he’d keep the police out of it and deal it with it his own way. Frightening, actually. With a man like him, he doesn’t even need to slap to wound deeply and unforgettably.

LR IS the perfect example of not just what is wrong with the typical woman of today…but how the culture has been engineered to push as many women as possible down the same path of “self-empowerment” as LR has done.

In a system for which a Father’s parental rights are not afforded almost zero consideration…a culture in which marriage is degraded, and adolescent attitudes extended well into adulthood, you get LR story writ large over and over and over again.

Note the circumstances of her personal story…than read between the lines.

A boyfriend who was all excited about having a baby…who starts to stay and work, and gradually escalate his drinking from casual to heavy drinking every single day.

It’s quite obvious LR became quite the pleasant person to live with (just as she’s made her presence appreciated so much here as well!).

So pleasant, her boyfriend preferred extra hours working and than drinking himself into a stupor….just so he could come home to deal with his no doubt “pleasant” girlfriend.

She’s managed to get under the skin of a whole lot of us men (and a few women too) in her week long participation.

Imagine LIVING with that.

Imagine busting your ass all day at your job, trying hard to make more money because you know your son is going to be born. You’re stepping up to become the provider you think you’re supposed to be.

Except, when you get home after trying to work harder to provide better for LR and your coming child…you don’t get credit, appreciation, reassurance or support.

Nah…it’s quite obvious given LR’s personality that she’s put out here for all to see…I’m sure the boyfriend grew to DREAD coming home from a long day at work.

Yeah Lady, he shouldn’t have hit you — there is no excuse for striking the pregnant woman with your baby in her womb. But you completely fail to even start to recognize your role in this travesty…(and what I mean by travesty is that in fact the tragedy in all this is your fatherless son who’s life will forever be shaped and affected negatively by your mistakes).

But even with his senses deadened by the alcohol, her verbal tongue lashings and criticisms were able to provoke him into behavior he most likely did not think was good for him either. I mean, I think I would last 1 day with LR before I would feel the compulsion to smack her…the dude lived with her for over a year before she finally drove him to cross that line!

An abusive wife beater is one who’s abusive behavior becomes apparent at the beginning of any relationship. But in this case, It took a year of nagging/arguing/bitching and him trying to escape into the bottle that finally drove him to cross the line into physical violence.

But, like the typical, self-centered, narcissist American woman of today, it’s all HIS fault. “He hit me, I left! His fault!” Under the feminist rubric of today, LR is completely exonerated for the tragedy of her broken home, after all, he hit her. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE! No other explanation is necessary

But I say, look at the pattern of behavior as she described it.

He “just decided” to start working later and later, and drinking more and more because “he had a personal problem.”

Yeah…we know what problem that was – coming home to a shrill, shrieking, never-satisfied, hyper-critical bitch who NEVER SHUTS UP.

Back in the old days…when women were held accountable for their behavior by the community and her peers and family, it would be quite obvious that LR became the harridan that drove her man to drinking. Maybe a friend, or an aunt or her own mother would have gave her some advice to appreciate and support her boyfriend….to create an environment he COULDN’T WAIT TO GET HOME TO. Not browbeat, nag, criticize and bitch at him until he becomes an alcoholic wife beater.

Women, when you marry or co-habitate with a man, you need to realize that YOU are the home. And the environment you create is going to be the one he looks forward to coming home to….or he’d rather work late and drink himself into oblivion rather than come home to face the environment you have created for him to live in.

I’m still married after 12 years, because I can honestly say I can’t wait to go home after work every single day…because I’m going to walk into a home with a generally pleasant, happy woman that will be affectionate towards me, is easy to converse with, as well as having a very well-cooked dinner for me to eat almost as soon as I’m in the door.

Of course, that’s only because I learned about game and no longer act like a beta chump that made her bitchy because she couldn’t respect me. While a few of you have guessed that LR’s baby’s daddy was an alcoholic, bad-boy alpha thug…

…I estimate an entirely different scenario. More like he was sinking into LTR beta-tude…the same one that almost killed my marriage. And the more beta he acted, the more contemptuos of him LR got. The more contemptuos she got, the bitchier she got whenever she was around him, the more he’d rather work and drink than come home to her contempt and disgust.

Sliding into beta-tude in a long term relationship can easily turn into a very destructive negative feed back loop that will turn any relationship into a death spiral…and doom a young boy to a life without a father.

Mirror, this is me, and I violated all good traditional Polish values by sleeping with a woman who was someone else’s. Some people (definitely AJ Travis) would love to see me dead, or possibly tortured. This is the magnitude of my crime.

If you don’t do that, you can’t be someone else or reform from it or move on or be a different man from the one that did it.

David from Hawaii: I know right know no man or nagging bitch is going to drive me to alcoholism. I had to go home to three nagging bitches for some of my formative years, with no male presence, and not once did I do any of that.

He wanted to have a child and to MARRY you, but after a couple of dust ups, you leave him…NEVER to hear from him again. OK.

Wants child….wants marriage…VANISHES WITH OUT A CUSTODY FIGHT??? Hmmmmm!

Again, your story is missing MAJOR elements of truth of which no one will ever know unless we hear his story.

I believe you’ve convinced yourself of an alternative thesis on how/why this guy bailed…and let’s be honest…there was something so detestable about you he would rather run, than fight (for his relationship and child).

Don’t try to pyscho-analyse here…HE LEFT YOU. Know this…he wanted a child…got one, wanted marriage…..swilled too much booze and had a 180 degree fundamental change in what he wanted…and was gone…with nary a fight for his offspring or YOU?

I am not saying I don’t believe your side, we only have half the story though….and a fishy one at that!

Oh, I’m not making excuses. He should have manned up and not tried to escape his problems by drinking.

But than again, we live in a culture for which men are indoctrinated to act beta, women are indoctrinated to be “empowered,” and that men are supposed to “make her happy.” When he follows the cultural norms that he thinks are supposed to make her happy…and they only maker her worse, often times he than turns to escape – affairs, drinking, etc.

My only real point here is that LR has been playing the martyr by giving all of us the gory details of HIS fault in her present circumstances…while ignoring or justifying her own role in the creation of her son’s broken home.

And Polish girls are supposed to be the good ones! don’t even get me started about Russian girls.

Women EVERYWHERE are devilish whores. They aren’t better in Asia or Poland or Russia or England. They are mercenary and capable of turning love into cruelty EVERYWHERE.

The main advantage in dating in SE Asia is that your relative status is higher – so you can date more women, and pick a devilish whore more to your liking. That and a greater % of the population is more likely to fall in love with you. That and they like to be housewifely.

It’s true that tourists get eaten alive by the girls when they travel. It takes a minimum of two years as an expat to get a handle on the soul of Asian women. And when you start to, you find that it’s simply the soul of a woman. They are devilish whores who are apt to get what they can from you, and are equally apt to be gamed into falling in love with you for a while.

And of course there is always the option of getting a young starry eyed devilish whore – 19 or early twenties. Or an inexperienced devilish whore in her mid to late twenties.

Westernized men routinely get eaten alive by Asian chicks, but expats don’t remain westernized. We grow out of that infantile stage, and become men.

VERY difficult to imagine. I think he’d keep the police out of it and deal it with it his own way. Frightening, actually. With a man like him, he doesn’t even need to slap to wound deeply and unforgettably.

I wouldn’t dare. Not that he’d ever give me real reason to.

I wouldn’t dream of calling in the police on you *shudder* for anything like slapping me or much of anything at all.

I’ve a question for you. Was your wife, during your period of beta-tude, constantly angry and berating about a multitude of issues?

If so, how did you handle and make the switch? I’m in a somewhat similar situation, and have trouble dealing with some of the outbursts. That is, its extremely hard for me to keep a cool head at times.

That’s not what Dave from Hawaii has repeatedly and persuasively reported, often in a lot of detail. Just the opposite. He said it felt like they were headed for divorce before he learned realtionship game by reading PUA books and sites. But that afterwards he turned it all around.

He never let his wife know that he’d studied game. He was making change as he learned so it wasn’t all at once.

He’s become the oracle of married relationship game on the board, with PA also adding.

Mr. M – it depends a lot on the woman. A lot of them have borderline personality disorder (such as Welmer’s ex), in which case their bitchiness is incurable. In that case you’ll need to replace her.

Otherwise, just imagine she is an unrully pet dog that you aquired after it’s already past it’s puppy stage. Treat her exactly like a pet dog. Kindly, but brook no disobedience, and escalate punishments as much as required to show that you are the head of the household, not the dog.

If she’s the freaky-flipped-out emotional kind, sometimes it works better to ignore her at that time, and later in an oblique way mention that her wack behaviour is lame. That’s for cases where the woman finds critisism impossible to face directly.

Don’t be afraid of showing anger. Your emotional space is sacred, and no one is to piss on it.

@PA no beef buddie, you are my e-homie. It’s just that I notice you become protective of Polish women(and you should be) when the American men write that they want to go to Poland and steel the 9-10’s. I was just pointing out how men are protective of their women esp those who are the “best”.

It’s one thing for your family to know that your boss, but something else entirely to have them walking around in fear of pops going postal.

If a wife cheats a man should have the right to go postal within wide latitude (Bhetti even talks about a severe beating working well in Arab culture, which attracts me) and she should FEAR what he will do, both physically and economically — because that’s what the law should once again allow in those circumstances and determine in that kind of clear female fault divorce.

@default- I’m not into violence so I wouldn’t knowingly slap you or any man unless I was out of mind. I’m afraid of unleashing the cave man that lurks inside of every man that even thousands of years of civilization hasn’t destroyed.

lurkerchic, for once, I agree with you
Strange but true this is the second or third time you’ve agreed with me.

maurice- women choose not to get married in the same numbers as before because their equal/higher social status makes it almost impossible for them to “marry up” to a man of higher status or power
Maurice, there are women who don’t want to marry any man, neither high status or low staus .These women aren’t all lesbians either. They have various reason for wanting to remain single. check out the Delany sisters.

tupac That was Nicole’s/Kthula’s schtick. She (aptly) pointed out that many women are mercenary whores after money.
Take out money & + female beauty & poon, then you have men.

Lurker American-born Blacks, however, have continually shown their resistance to the American way
Do you mind listing some examples. demand being taken care of while contributing little
Most American blacks work Lurker.

The sky is falling, eh? I’d actually say that this is the best time to be alive (in the first world at least). Disease, crime, and infant mortality are all quite low and average life span and standards of living are all quite high. I don’t know why people pine for the 50’s. I like modern technology like the internet and cell phones.

Besides the 50’s were an anomaly. America emerged from WWII unscathed while our competitors lost many men and a hell of lot of infrastructure. Hell, some of them were determined to pursue wrongheaded policies that would further set them back, e.g. China and its cultural revolution.

As for extrapolating trends to predict what things will be like many years into the future, HA! Things change friends.

Just some food for thought, since people on this blog seem overly concerned about woman as a source of happiness or dissatisfaction. I mean, what if “women” don’t make a difference? What if it comes down to a particular human making you happy, not some archtype?

Read to the end to see the kind of life the chief investigator of the study built for himself.

There is a lot of talk that woman’s financial independence makes them more difficult for men. Well, that goes both ways. Just make yourself independent of women, too. I mean, you don’t need one to cook for you, and certainly you don’t need her for sex, which is just a commodity, bought and sold like pig bellies and wheat futures. And which now is going for bargain prices.

but at the end of the day I could do better, with regards to my own mental state, without having to butt heads with her.

If she butts heads with you, the battles is already lost. She feels she has an equal right to an opinion, and a right to express such opinions through quarrel. Bad.

Start with variations of “shut the fuck up” Some that I routinely use:

You talk to much.
Shhh.
Don’t talk to me while I’m eating.
Don’t talk to me when I’m watching a movie.
– place fingers to her lips, and pinch them closed
shut the fuck up, woman!
Don’t talk.
Stop talking.

If you can’t get her to shut the fuck up, all is lost. She’s hopeless, as is any dominance over her.

The more I tried to supplicate her…to plead with her…to beg her “why do you have to be so angry? Can’t we just get along? Is this really that big of a deal? Look, I’m sorry….”

Oh yes, I was ALWAYS apologizing. Oh, and I usually begged for sex.

I would try to use logic and reason to deal with her emotional state. Never worked. Ever.

In other words, I was letting her emotional state dictate my response. I was trying to appease her mood.

After reading up on game, I gained insight into the basic, biological motivations of females. I quickly realized that I was acting beta, and she was no longer attracted to me…making her angrier and angrier by the day because she couldn’t stand the fact that she was married to and living with a spineless, grovelling chump always searching for appeasement and begging for sex.

Once I was conscious of that dynamic…I became conscientious about how I began acting around her.

For a recent an example of that change of mindset I’m talking about:

Just the other night, I called her to let her know I was coming home so she could time dinner to be ready when I got home.

I was dead tired from my martial arts training that day (I was doing full contact kickboxing training, very rigorous)…and I stopped at my friends house at around 5:00pm to drop something off that I had borrowed from them and have a quick drink before heading home.

After one drink, I lay down on my friend’s couch for a moment…and the next thing I know, it’s 2:30am in the morning.

I drove home, and got into bed. I thought she was asleep…but she promptly said in a real bitchy tone “Where you having fun tonight?!?!”

And promptly rolled over and went to sleep. I don’t even remember what she said to me in response.

The “old” me would have been begging her for forgiveness and apologizing profusely.

She was still upset the next morning…so I let her be upset. She tried to argue with me about it, and I would just shrug, and go start cooking breakfast. She would say something pointed, and I would change the subject.

When she kept pushing me, I just told her straight up – I was dead tired, I lay down for a moment and literally passed out form exhaustion. What is their to apologize for? I’m going to eat breakfast now and enjoy the beautiful morning…care to join me?”

She may have grumbled a bit more, but in the end, we ended up having a nice breakfast, and the topic was dead…other than the occasional, off-hand joke from her about how “You don’t come home anymore,” over the next few days…to which I would either ignore it, change the subject or “agree and amplify” to the point of absurdity.

“Of course dear, don’t you know us pimp daddies have a lot of hoes that take up all our time!”

The old, beta me would have been banished to the couch, subjected to a few days of silent treatment and begging for her forgiveness…only making it worse and worse the more I would grovel and beg.

DA-the problem with your reasoning is that you’ve accepted the idea that your beta behavior is out of your control, and that you could never be in a relationship because your inherent beta-ness will automatically doom you. You don’t HAVE to give in to your beta impulses. But hey, I know you’re not asking me for advice, you’re just justifying your chosen path of O m e g a-tude

A.J Travis, forgive me for misspelling your name. I did the very same thing to commenter Clarence last night. I may forget your name but I won’t forget you.

default, thats^^not flirting btw.

Mr. M If so, how did you handle and make the switch? I’m in a somewhat similar situation, and have trouble dealing with some of the outbursts. That is, its extremely hard for me to keep a cool head at times

I’m not Dave but let me offer some advice. Run like hell if you don’t have any children with her. Why is she so important? Can’t you find another woman who is as good if not better than she? Why stay around and take crap from people you don’t have a link to. The next time she berates you, say “that’s it, I’m done” proceed to walk out the door. Don’t return her calls and call the cops if she comes by your place.

The 4 factors that will swing the pendulum back the other way even faster and further than the tits of a 55-year-old feminist :

1) Whichever innovation happens first, software (3-D/VR/Hologram sex) or hardware (sexbots), all women 7 and below are in deep trouble. Those who claim that a virtual woman cannot replace a real woman must also account for the fact that the artificial woman is a 10/10+, while the world of real women is filled with 5s and 6s.

Modern feminism is a byproduct of inventions by BETA MALES (vaccuum cleaner, dishwasher, washer/dryer, microwave, etc.) Women’s actions had nothing to do with it – they are fully governed by the inventions of men. Beta males will invent the devices that correct the bubble of feminism.

2) Disenfranchised men (whether through their place on the skill ladder or via the divorce court machinery) WILL do what has always happened in eras past : they will band together and start taking things by force, usually from single women.

Marriage used to offer a protection of some sort, which has been forgotten in our modern prosperity. Wait until that becomes a factor again.

3) More PUAs. The motto is “More Cads, less Dads”.

4) More Islamic inroads into the West. It won’t be long before Muslims begin to clash hard with the feminists and faggots.

All 4 of these in tandem spell deep trouble for feminists. Ironically, studies show that women in America are unhappier than ever, while women in traditionally male-run societies are happier.

Leftists/feminists/faggots are so arrogant, that they think they can re-write some basic biological truths, whether through feminism/misandry, shoving flamboyant faggotism into everyone’s face, weirder and weirder expansions of affirmative action, etc.

You can fool mother nature for a while, but she always whacks you back hard in the end.

David from Hawaii: I’m convinced abdicating religious values — or whatever led to that — has resulted in problems as well. I’m biased, but everyone else seems to be seeing this quite clearly as well.

Doug:

Bhetti even talks about a severe beating working well in Arab culture

I was speaking about it more in the context of therapy. If a person — male or female — is not acting within social expectations of their psychological behaviour. I’m wouldn’t say it’s universally true but they can expect an escalation of violence until they stop. In those societies, it’d still be harsher on the men. The unacknowledged truth is it probably works. A painful kind of work, but it works, as ‘therapy’.

A free-market dictatorship run by a council of smart, right-wing people, is perhaps better than a democracy where women vote, resulting in idiots like Pelosi, Barney Frank, Ted Kennedy, etc. kept in office for decades, with no accountability.

China may have realized that voting = women voting = the destruction of a sustainable society.

Hmm…I need to ask then…how do you avoid from being baited into her emotional state?

That is, the following morning she’s obviously not being a nice, loving, tactful wife when arguing why you never came home. I’m sure she’s dropping snide remarks and/or elevating the tone. Shaming perhaps.

I know I respond to my gf’s anger in kind, and at that point I know I could have done better. The end result is okay, since I never back down and supplicate, but I personally would prefer avoiding dramatic scenes.

It’s conventional wisdom that the number one cause of relationships breaking up is “financial” issues.

We have never had a tougher time financially than these past 6 months. In a B2B sales-based job, I haven’t had a commission since last November.

Our income has literally been cut in half. I’m struggling to make ends meet harder than when I was a a full time, 100% self-supporting student in college. I’m actually seriously considering bankruptcy – and I have never been late or missed a credit payment my entire adult life up ’til now.

Yet, we haven’t fought once over the current mess we are in.

We used to fight about money all the time…when I was a beta chump.

IF you are married or in a LTR, don’t be a beta.

My theory is that the sexual dynamics of your relationship, and her respect and attraction for you, is literally the unseen, hidden root behind most every other problem you’re having.

LR: So you’ve backed away from saying that being a loving provider to your wife is equivalent to taking advantage of them to saying it’s just how the world works and someone getting betrayed and scammed is the lifestyle he chose. I guess you’re improving.

But if you think betaness is unattactive and want to shrug your shoulder when one gets taken advantage of, you ought not to be such a damn hypocrite and scream against the blog which educates men about the consequences of that choice.

PA/xsplat: it’s true that if you marry a foreigner there is the risk that she might cheat or turn out to be bad. But that same risk exists with dating any woman. This blog is full of stories of people who’ve been cheated on/cuckolded/abused/raped in divorce court by an American women. If you believe the statistics though, marriages between Americans and foreigners end up in divorce less often than women from other cultures.

It’s not possible to go into the dating world without any risk or without any danger of being manipulated by a woman. Even if you’re an Alpha, your woman could always find another bigger alpha or just someone who struck her fancy that day.

The only way to not get taken advantage of by a woman and be completely safe is to live like David Alexandar and sit home by your computer masturbating to 20 zillion GB of porn.

But, not all of us are satisfied with just getting hugs from non-date girlfriend.

It’s a much mushier attitude than I now profess – but essentially the same. Basically, I advocate acting like a parent, or animal trainer, in relashionship to women.

If I’ve changed it’s that I’m even more comfortable with even more dominance, and value that a good choice to begin with is essential – so letting a girl go and stepping back into the game is just one movement in the dance. A good changeup is now and then the only way forward. Stasis is going backwards.

Hmm…I need to ask then…how do you avoid from being baited into her emotional state?

That is, the following morning she’s obviously not being a nice, loving, tactful wife when arguing why you never came home. I’m sure she’s dropping snide remarks and/or elevating the tone. Shaming perhaps.

I know I respond to my gf’s anger in kind, and at that point I know I could have done better. The end result is okay, since I never back down and supplicate, but I personally would prefer avoiding dramatic scenes.

This is where I will cite our host, and his invaluable “16 commandments of poon.”

Her emotions are a hurricane, her soul a saboteur. Think of yourself as a bulwark against her tempest. When she grasps for a pillar to steady herself against the whipping winds or yearns for an authority figure to foil her worst instincts, it is you who has to be there… strong, solid, unshakeable and immovable.

In fact, reading that line, the first time I found this blog, that put the so-called “capstone” on my personal transformation after beginning to change my behavior via awareness of game.

Think of yourself as a bulwark against her tempest.

I literally have repeated this line in my mind when she’s upset and angry…

It’s not just what you say, but how you say it. Your body language. Your facial expressions. Your stance.

You have to say “It’s no big deal” and you have to SHOW it.

When she finds that her emotional outbursts and anger cannot manipulate me into being submissive to her…she no longer finds any use in remaining angry.

I can’t tell you a sure fire way to “win” in any situation…but the best way I can put it is when she’s upset, you can only control yourself and how you act.

When my entire attitude was “Please don’t be mad! I just want us to get along,” it just made her more mad.

Now, through my calm actions and demeanor and body language, I simply convey the attitude of “Your mad? Big deal. Be upset if you want to, I’M going to be enjoying my life.”

Oh, and I do have to say…my wife was never a nagging bitch when we were dating, nor during the first couple of years of marriage. I literally sank into too comfortable, too familiar, too predictable and too Beta.

Way up the thread: “Ethnic Mexicans have been in the U.S. as long as any of those groups you mentioned and they never showed any sign of assimilating, even before multiculturalism and lax immigration enforcement.”

Not exactly true; see, for example Raul Castro (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raul_Hector_Castro) (former Governor of Arizona, not current President of Cuba). Mexicans were never going to be country club WASPs, but to say that they “never showed any sign of assimilating” is way off the mark. The multi-culti cult put an end to that, unfortunately.

Still, the whiskey school would assume you’d scream at her for being such an insolent bitch, then smack her one. Or some such. Jerk Game, does it really work?

Yeah, I’m positive you can use “Jerk” game in a LTR – but in my personal case, I use it sparingly.

One time I made her late for a flight to Vegas because we were at a friend’s party. She started SCREAMING at me in the car, because it really was my fault that she missed her flight to go visit her family. She went ballistic. Hysterical. Screaming and crying, because she wasn’t going to get there in time for her Mother’s birthday.

The one and only time I ever screamed back at her. I looked right at her and screamed “SHUT THE FUCK UP! IT’S HAPPENED! YELLING AND SCREAMING IS NOT GOING TO GET YOU ON THAT PLANE! IT’S FUCKING OVER!

That was the one and only time I think I have ever truly scared my wife. She jumped into the back seat of the car when I yelled at her. She told me later that she thought I was going to hit her ’cause I looked so mad. In 12 years, that’s gotta be the only time I ever let my anger out like that. I’m generally very low-key and mellow…I got a long fuse.

It’s very interesting to note after the long, quiet ride home…she actually got turned on by my little show of aggression. heh.

I’m not into violence so I wouldn’t knowingly slap you or any man unless I was out of mind. I’m afraid of unleashing the cave man that lurks inside of every man that even thousands of years of civilization hasn’t destroyed.

I am not sure how you would unknowingly slap me.

Because we live in a largely peaceful age a lot of women do not understand this. Inside that timid accountant is 90 pounds of fury ready to break out.

Regarding a woman slapping me:

There are very few situations where I would accept it. She gets one shot. If it happens again she is gone. If I should strike in defense and the cops are called (by her) then I am going to get my money’s worth while we wait for the boys in blue.

However I am not itching for violence. Because of my nature and the way law/society views these things I will not be the first to hit.

If so, how did you handle and make the switch? I’m in a somewhat similar situation, and have trouble dealing with some of the outbursts. That is, its extremely hard for me to keep a cool head at times.

What he did was learn game. The parts of game that are relevant for relationships, rather than pickup. Though there’s a lot of overlap, other than initial approach lines.

His comments, especially the best ones for what you want, are mostly within the last three or four months. Not much in the last month actually, so say three months starting in February. (Maybe Jan but your beginning Feb.) If your serious about your marriage (i.e. your life, esp. if you have kids) you’d go back to Feb 1 and do a find on every “Dave from Hawaii” (or just Hawaii should do it) from then through April). He doesn’t comment all that much except on game and marriage. Well sometimes feminism and the pussification of men, which will also be good for you to read.

So are you serious or not?

As for what to do when your woman is raging, the image to have is that you need to be the calm and strong rock that she sometimes dashes like turbulent seas up against. DO NOT get angry at her. Don’t argue with her when she’s being like that. Say you’ll talk about it when she’s calmer. She’ll proably try to goad you into drama and then act morally superior about any anger on your part while any on hers is completely justified or inconsequential or didn’t happen.

But do condescend to her a little, or sometimes a lot, when she’s being like that, regardless of how more furious that makes her. I mean by being calming and going ssssh, or there there, etc.

When she’s being like that also think of yourself as a loving and somewhat indulgent father dealing with a 13yr old girl who actually loves and respects you (pretend at first as necessary) but is throwing a tantrum. Not a father who completely spoils but rather is firm in his values and won’t let her get away with too much, but will love and forgive her regardless (short of adultery, etc.). You’ll be amazed at how well this will work after a few times of doing it well. You really will.

Then learn playful teasing (“negging”), demonstrating value, getting her to qualify herself, giving her emotional rollercoaster rides, and so on. Rarely apologize unless you’re clearly in the wrong and she isn’t equally, and then do it once without repeating if she doesn’t soften her anger / moral dudgeon. Just tough it out without engagement. Don’t seek her approval. Make her seek yours. Then she’ll give you hers spontaneously.

Make her chase you. Don’t be eager to make everything emotionally right all the time. But act as if nothings wrong when it really isn’t, as opposed to giving credence to her absurd peeves and irritations. That’s not to say be completely heedless of things that do bother her. Just don’t be all apologetic but fairly evaluate whether the change she wants is reasonable, and if it is then do it. Otherwise don’t and tell her it’s unreasonable. Your wife is NOT always right, and even when she is, be sparing in apology, but rather act to rectify.

How’s this for a compromise on the voting thing:
Everybody gets to vote, but the vote is broken down by active participation in the military, thus demonstrating a willingness to kill and die for the country. So if its 85% men, 15% women, then the men’s vote automatically counts as 85% of the total votes.

Heh. For me, I would call it that. I haven not ever before…or since, ever told my wife to shut the fuck up.”

Haven’t had to.

Oh, you don’t know what you’re missing. Say it with humor and irony, a little smirk, and a twinkle in your eye. Be mischeavous about it. Your mouth will love the taste of it as you command “shut the fuck up, woman!”

She’ll get the joke – but the subtext will be laid out. You didn’t offend, but the subtext put you in a dominant position.

Nearly everything I say is some variation of this. Fun, flirty, and with subtexts that cement my position.

If the threat of violence is needed to maintain non-cheating, the relationship is not worth having in the first place.

It’s attitudes like these that have helped along the ruin of feminist legislation.

It focuses her mind Whiskey. Helps her resist temptation.

You yourself then turn around and say I’ve had women I’ve lived with that I was sure hadn’t cheated on me, actually have done so. You make no sense. You’re wrong about that, I’m 98% sure, and I’m no chump and not without suspicions when there’s reason.

However I HAVE had gf’s cheat on me. Two of them. Just not living with me ones. I’ve had other fuck buddy or non exclusive or open type things but they don’t count.

A woman wont have sex with a man she doesn’t respect and will cheat on him is she ever loses respect. IIRC Nichole mentioned in reply to a question of mine that she considered respect to be being treated appropriately to her place in the culture in which she lived. Status in other words. I disagree. Respect is Fear Lite. For a woman to respect a man she has on some level to fear him, if not what he will do then what he could do if provoked.

Debbi Harry, singer for Blondie, mentioned in an interview that she once had an opportunity to cheat on her boyfriend with Mick Jagger but didn’t because she respected her boyfriend too much. He was the brains of the band, got her off of drugs and from appearances the stronger one emotionally. They eventually broke up but when he had a serious illness she put her career on hold and devoted herself to nursing him back to health. Not to bad for a NY hipster celebrity. Not too bad looking in her prime either.

The rare case of the heterosexual woman who is such the control freak that she doesn’t want to be dominated is the absolute worst possible manifestation of female.

So there is nothing of value to lose by becoming dominant.

Make her life a living hell, if you have to. Either she’ll change, or she’ll leave. Those are the only options that allow for quality of life.

Well I’d say sort of but not exactly.

First of all act the way Dave from Hawaii, then I without having read him here first, said to be.

Then act dominant, usually in a playful, but serious about it, way. You’ve described some of that. Our styles are different but they overlap. Also you’re in a different environment. That mostly affects how one begins.

If she considers your acting dominant, sometimes very dominant, a living hell, and won’t change, then as you say good riddance. (Though you should have figured this out in very early days. But hey we all start somewhere.)

To be fair to betas though DfH, particularly gen Y ones with who’ve been raised under pervasive feminism their whole lives if they’re white and especially if college bound, they’ve got the whole of mainstream culture and education, almost, working against their manning up.

So it’s something of an uphill battle for many. But it can be done, as you illustrate.

In some ways maybe it’s easy though. I.e. if betas do thoroughly de program, maybe it isn’t that hard to be a relative alpha or anyway lesser alpha among gen Y age cohorts these days, given the competition.

More PUAs? not going to happen. The absolute dedication and persistence coupled with the emotional PAIN you have to go through to get good at this is simply beyond most beta boys.
I’m currently enrolled in BradP’s ( Number 1 PUA in the world) 30/30 club and the reality of the task ahead of me is enormous. Going out infield everyday and practising game is like a mirror constantly reflecting back at you every personality defect you have. Obviously the rewards at the end of the journey when you finally internalise everything you’ve learnt is worth it but most PUAs never reach that nirvana, most of them give up; another victim of a bitchy HB10.

I certainly wasn’t a Beta Chump when we first met, and even in the first couple of years of marriage.

It was over time that I got too comfortable. I took too much for granted. I became very complacent. Lazy. Rather than make the choices, I just wanted to go along to get along, and assumed that she wanted the same thing.

When she’d get upset, I would try to “buy” her complacency by kissing her ass.

Looking back on it…I know I cannot fault her for being a bitch. She had every right to be upset with being married to a wimp.

Funny thing is, I’m no “wimp” when it comes to dealing with other people. I’ve been training martial arts for half my life, I’ve had my share of street fights, worked as a bouncer when I was in college, and have had a few amateur full contact kickboxing matches. I’ve knocked guys out and I’ve been knocked out.

I once fought 3 guys at once in a bar parking lot…but than I’d come home and let my wife walk all over me, and cede all authority to her. I lived in literal FEAR of her disapproval and anger.

And she did not like it, one bit.

I was certainly not the guy she initially married.

“Game” just gave me the wake up call I so badly needed.

It was literally like the Matrix…I took the red pill and saw the matrix for what it was – the illusion of politically correct gender roles in stark contrast to the actual reality.

If you live your life according to the blue pill takers, the SWPL mentality…the matrix WILL literally suck your life force from you.

I’m a middling beta who is not totally unattractive to women. But I was never great at relationships, and I find it hard to find a girlfriend now. Girls I meet in bars are flaky – phone numbers are given out and then the phone is never answered. Messages are not returned. Law school doesn’t have that many relationship-quality girls, and the ones that are there, 98% of the time, already have boyfriends. I started my internship today. One 8 and one 7 are in my group. Both have long-term boyfriends. Fuck.

Many of my friends, however, have girlfriends. These guys are probably mostly middling to greater betas. Their girlfriends are attractive. Unfortunately, this means there aren’t a group of guys for me to hit on girls with, because they are often with their girlfriends. So it’s roadblocks on every side. Because I’m not horrible looking, I think it’s actually easier for me to get laid than to get a girlfriend. And I’d kind of like the girlfriend, for social proof if nothing else.

But the fact that SO MANY attractive women have “boyfriends” is killing me.

“I never understood that in being a placating, supplicating, spineless sycophant that left all the decision making and leadership decisions up to her, I was FAILING to act like a man.”

I like a man who’ll take ownership of his part – kudos. My friends who are unhappily married have often said out loud they wish their men would take the reigns and act like men. I’m still not convinced of the whole alpha/beta thing , but I do think we like men who act like men. Isn’t that alone enough to convince men to man up? Or is Game really about teaching men what real men look like. Curious.

Jack, just because they are taken doesn’t mean you can’t use the opportunity to “practice” on them.

Take your gaming strategies and try to start using them on the ladies in your group…even if you’re one of those guys that strictly considers it taboo to take another man’s woman…nothing wrong with a little bit of flirting with attractive women to build your confidence and experience.

Hell, I ‘game’ all of the women in my life, to one extent or the other. The negs. The backhanded compliments. Playful teasing. Even a little edgy sexual inuendo in a playful way.

Females love an “entertaining guy.” And a guy with game is most female’s favorite entertainment.

Bhetti-
“A.J. Travis: I’m pretty sure chic noir doesn’t do that on purpose and a knowledgeable person would assume dyslexia, especially since she has constant difficulty with new names.”

I don’t assume anything. If she tells me she has some sort of disability where she can’t copy and paste things on her computer, or some such, I will apologize to her. If instead, she was just too bored or ‘busy’ to get it right (either time) then both of you can go to hell.

It is laughable that at one minute you are attempting to chastise me for what you perceive as “psycopathic” nature, then a few posts later you are encouraging Dave to “Nurture that fighting spirit” and telling him how “Awesome” his “visceral, extreme reaction” is.

Proving once again that women love aggressiveness, but only from alphas, of course.

Get this and get it quick Roissy’s girls, this revolution is not for you, and women like you are not going to like the outcome no matter who wins.

In short, I am not trying to recruit you, or the alpha men who enable you. It’s the Beta guys you have all collectively fucked over that I want, and you’re attitude and behavior towards them is all the recruiting tool I need.

If you don’t want to get run over in the process, stay the hell out of the way.

A partitioning of the USA along ethnic/racial lines would solve most of America’s problems – this would had the added benefit of causing most non-Whites in America to slowly wither away since they depend so heavily on welfare pilfered from the tax money of White workers.

But the fact that SO MANY attractive women have “boyfriends” is killing me.

Do you have any sense of whether any or many of them cheat on their boyfriends sometimes?

Don’t consider girls with boyfriends that aren’t your buddies (just knowing them doesn’t count) as being off limits. They aren’t married or living together.

Lots of times girls will use having a boyfriend as a shield or shit test to easily fend off weaker flirt attempts. Sometimes they have one but marginally, i.e they’ve lost much interest or there are problems but don’t want to actively search or do the bar/club scene without him. Often they’re ultimately willing to be scooped away.

Yes, betas cannot get laid. The typical path is: no G/F in HS, college, with more women than men, outside the Ivies, and lots of alcohol, and no real adult life, even beta guys get laid. Outside College, with nothing to bring women and betas together, and no booze to lower inhibitions, and no man-shortage to cause women to lower their standards and date betas, yeah, guys can go YEARS without girls.

My experience was quite the opposite. I went to Rolla in the 1990s. It is an engineering school. ONLY an engineering school. See where this is going?

3 boys for every 1 girl attending. They claimed. I believe their ‘ratio’ to be lies, nothing but lies. The number of women seemed MUCH less than that.

I didn’t have anything like Game back then, just decent looks, force-of-personality, and lack of neediness.

For what it’s worth, Dave from Hawaii nails what I feel is the only, real productive use of game, to help a man be a man and have successful long-term relationships with women. Meaning, ultimately a good marriage.

But living the PUA lifestyle, is a bastardization of what being a real man is. It actually, in my opinion, makes men into a caricature of a real man — A fantasy creation that changes as quickly as women’s taste in fashion, because it is dreamt up by the same people — women.

The ultimate ‘power’ of the PUA, is that they know how to give women what they all secretly crave: sex with rockstar-assholes.

My opinion of female promiscuity stands in opposition to what lots of so-called scientists promote.

The female of our species when not encumbered by that disastrous invention, The Pill, are sexy, horny and available, across the spectrum. The 60% of women on The Pill that don’t have their libido crushed, are in fact, ready and available. The deeper problem is that The Pill distorts female psychology and changes their response patterns to male stimuli. So if you run perfect Game and it goes screwy for no apparent reason, it might not be you at all!

In general, my experience and observation, the more beautiful the woman the more sexually available. Now, this seems bimodal — the beautiful woman who overvalues herself in point of fact is less available. The rest use their beauty to get the sex they want and believe they deserve.

Think about it — a beautiful woman will find a man when she wants one. So the idea that she’s keeping herself hyper-guarded is a total fallacy. She’s just not sleeping with an AFC. If you saw the number of super-hot women coming thru the OB/GYN clinics for HPV treatment, belies the idea that somehow beautiful women aren’t promiscuous.

So, in Roissy’s sexual dystopia, will 5,6,7’s benefit by upping their availability. Initiate Sarcasm. Not a ghost of a chance in hellEnd Sarcasm. In the dystopia, these women have nothing to offer an alpha. I haven’t bothered with anything less than an 8 in 20 years. I’m not going to bang an available 6 or 7 when I can easily get casual sex with 8’s or 9’s. And in the dystopia the 5,6,7’s live in a fantasy world where they think they can get a better male. So their choice IS nothing or AFC. Guess what? I bet they choose their vibrators.

You are emblematic of the repelling decay of society, which you profess to champion. You are unable to embrace a humility that was the the cornerstone of the champions of our civilization; a proud legacy that was too imperative to necessitate codification. A stunning paradox, you bask in hubris and privilege, having earned nothing but the rudiments and calling it the divine Whole. Witness the “time” and devotion you bring to yourself as evidence.

You really are what He would consider ugly. I weep for your parents who surely sleep thinking that “this is the best we could hope for;” I weep for your son who will have only a horizontal outlook, and I weep for our civilization, as we slept and allowed this to happen.

I admonish you to stop typing with your “free time” (away from your child); pick up a book that your father’s father read, or email me (or some other traditionalist) for some help on walking in some footsteps to pride yourself upon.

Or tattoo your pagan goddess of choice on your other ass cheek along with a “Denny’s” logo above your sphincter to signify “always open,” so as to finish this chapter of misery you continue to impel upon us.

I visited your blog and read all of your entries earlier in the day. Well written. I think you’re interesting in spite of what you call your betaness. You’re angry and heck that emotion is a great motivator for action. Just be sure that you channel it in a way which will get you happier not bitterer (sp?). You’re young in man years (heh) and have, in spite of what you read here, a great chance to be happy with or without a fine woman (your choice). Not to burst a bubble but is there a strong likelihood that a beta revolution is going to happen? From what I’m reading from other posters not so much. Admirable as it is to want to make a difference and it is admirable, the energy it takes with likely frustration at the end is wasting what you have now.

Yes, giving women too much economic and political power has been a HUGE mistake.

There have hardly ever been ANY truly great female politicians or leaders (except maybe Joan D’Arc, and she was probably a dyke) – similarly, women are clearly inferior to men as businesspeople, inventors (women have invented NOTHING of note), scientists, philosophers, travelers/explorers, architects, artists, religious figures, etc. There has never been a female genius because women seem genetically incapable of being one. Women aren’t even funny either unless they are a dyke of have certain dykeish qualities.

Yup, women are inferior to men in almost every way and must be treated accordingly.

Get this and get it quick Roissy’s girls, this revolution is not for you, and women like you are not going to like the outcome no matter who wins.

In short, I am not trying to recruit you, or the alpha men who enable you. It’s the Beta guys you have all collectively fucked over that I want, and you’re attitude and behavior towards them is all the recruiting tool I need.

If you don’t want to get run over in the process, stay the hell out of the way.

Bhetti is right about this and you are wrong. If you can’t perceive that Chic IS a likely supporter of some changes you want, or more likely than many, you’re not very perceptive. If you think what you want doesn’t need allies you’re nuts. Not that I think what you want is very likely.

The thing to focus on are smaller and concrete steps first, like the elimination of no fault divorce re: economic consequences and capped child support or certainly capable child support by the effect of a prenup.

It is laughable that at one minute you are attempting to chastise me for what you perceive as “psycopathic” nature, then a few posts later you are encouraging Dave to “Nurture that fighting spirit” and telling him how “Awesome” his “visceral, extreme reaction” is.

What’s laughable is your misreading of the situation. First the David she was advising to “nurture that fighting spirit” was David w/ an iPod, aka David Alexander, the board “woe is me in ever getting sex with women” omega, who’s lately being showing some signs of growing a pair. No alpha he.

Further, she said that to him in the same comment where she said he misread me in needing fear to keep a woman or anything close. Me who she’s become online way into, as all the regulars on here know and as her comments even today would strongly hint. I.e., she wasn’t worried about sounding disloyal to me or offending me because people know the score. She was trying to help him some despite things.

most men would rather learn how to manage their life-situations to their betterment (even if it involves some effort) than just abdicate wholesale

Abdication is a perfectly legimate form of management.

that you could never be in a relationship because your inherent beta-ness will automatically doom you. You don’t HAVE to give in to your beta impulses

I like being a beta, and I’m not willing to give that up for cheap sex. Plus, it’s much easier to opt out and stay at home. Hell, just look at the arguments and stuff you have to deal with in regards to your significant other despite having game.

As I said ASDF, she WAS a massive bitch…when I was acting like a massive beta chump.

I’ve come to realize, it literally and figuratively was my fault.

I never understood that in being a placating, supplicating, spineless sycophant that left all the decision making and leadership decisions up to her, I was FAILING to act like a man.

And even if she didn’t consciously think it, I now know she was simply upset and disgusted with how I was acting. It was more of a subconscious thing.

Every time Dave from Hawaii tells his story, some guys always inevitably say wow your wife was a bitch, why didn’t you leave her? What guys don’t see is that even if he left her and found a new woman who treated him like a king at first, if he remained a beta chump the new chick would have a 95% chance of turning into just as much of a “bitch” in 10 years as Dave’s wife did. Women are hard-wired to hate beta chumps in relationships, even if not right away but over time eventually it will happen. Too many guys think to just keep blaming the women and changing partners only to keep finding that their new women turn into total bitches too over time. If you are a beta chump, 95% of all women of value will end up treating you like crap over time. You can lie to yourself and just say oh it’s the women and not me, I’ll just remain beta but change women instead but it won’t work.

That’s an amusing thought. Game corrects only the hole in the Venusian arts. I know the PUA community sells its whole product line on the whole Inner Game and being a Better Man meme, but it’s just marketing.

My business abilities translated into Game, but the reverse doesn’t really happen. Or rather, I should say I have never seen it happen.

@chicnoir “who would mother such children. Humans are a breed of animals who can’t have children and move on after the eggs are hatched. It takes at the bare minimum 10-13 years before a child can stand on its’ own in the real world.

The single-father/single-mother would mother such a child. Other than breast-feeding I see no difference in what either party can do as a single parent. Two parents are better, but when you are going singleton, each type will have its strenths/weaknesses.

A successful professional man can easily raise a child on his own, especially if he can afford daycare (or a full-time nanny if he is really sucessful).

Since women caused this mess, and it is not in their interest to change it back (why would any woman vote for capped child support or the repeal of no-fault divorce?) I do not think, however well-intentioned she may seem, Chick or any other woman will help us in this… Until they see that we are winning.

But I am open to the idea. If you are a Beta man, and have a solid argument to the contrary, I’m listening.

If you’re an alpha, or just want to state your opinion as fact, then, sorry, but I’ll hold fast.

And I did not misread Bhetti’s intent, which was to admonish me for saying things that she didn’t like. I made no assumptions about who she was praising.

It never ceases to amaze me that the women who comment here do not judge me based on the substance of my argument, but only if I say something that pleases them.

At the risk of pissing you off, as I am a woman, I have to agree with what Bhetti said:

“If you use that as a standard, you are basically going to get nowhere with your revolution. You need to preach to those who know no better, rather than the intellectuals, because they’re the ones most likely to follow you and blindly.”

1. To be an A-hole. Because women love A-holes. You must of course be the “right” kind of A-hole for the social setting. The various books, stuff on newsgroups, Roosh/Roissy’s blogs, etc. are good starting points to being a total A-hole.

2. Have something that gives you status/power/whatever. Amateur boxing. Musicianship. MONEY. All the attractive women with the boyfriends, their boyfriends have this as well as being total A-holes.

You_Know — It’s certainly true that women are not well represented in the sciences, the arts, and engineering. BUT … there are a number who were there, and were giants. Ada Lovelace, the daughter of Lord Byron (yes him) was the first computer programmer (before there was a computer!) the inventor of probability (she used to win at gambling) and a pioneer in statistics. Florence Nightengale’s main contribution, was not selfless nursing, but a stunning presentation using a polar pie chart that made clear that deaths in the Crimean theater were primarily from lack of handwashing, and clean bedding/bandages. NOT combat. Parliament was stunned and ordered Doctors (against their wishes) to wash their hands. And use clean bedding/bandages. Marie Curie, Admiral Grace Hopper, Hedy Lamarr (co-inventor of frequency hopping, she got the idea from playing the piano and doing chord changes), all deserve mention.

Women can’t replace men in the arts or sciences. There aren’t many geniuses, or even middling talents. But there were SOME female geniuses, and they deserve pride of place along the rest.

Just as I suggested earlier you have managed to make it all my fault and even refuse to believe that I left him.

Lady Obtuseness…I did NOT “make it all your fault.” I merely pointed out that according to your story, it’s all HIS fault. You present yourself as if you’re blameless. Just simply giving you a dose of reality. I never said he was blameless or not at fault…only that you have your own share of the blame. Accept it.

You also accuse me of keeping him from his child.

I never accused you of that. What I wrote is that your failure to choose a satisfactory mate to impregnate you and your failure to make your relationship work with him has doomed your son to a life without a Father. But see, you’re demonstrating quite aptly that you are simply unable to own your own mistakes. You’ve done nothing but excuse, rationalize and justify your behavior and your choices…by blaming it ALL on him.

Right…. he’s the victim here. He wanted a child, wanted to live with me, wanted to be married. Somehow he had NO IDEA what a horribe harpie I was (and yet you’d call me stupid for not knowing what kind of guy he was so we’ll use your own logic).

Reading comprehension, dear. The only real victim here is your son.

Everything you stated shows that if a woman shows ANY displeasure in a man it’s HER fault if he acts like a child, hits a pregnant woman, and almost knocks his own son out of my arms???

There was no way I could bitch at him all the time because he worked all the time and I rarely saw him but for a few hours in the morning. Also he was working crazy long hours before we met, so stop making everything about ME.

Heh. You’re the one that has sidetracked this entire blog community to a discussion about YOU.

Based on your own relating of your story, you acted as if he just “decided” to start drinking heavily and working longer hours.

Lady, been there, seen that a hundred times. The kind of man that is eager to work long hours and drink himself silly everynight, is a man that does NOT have a pleasant domecile he can seek refuge from the world.

Nah…he was avoiding the battlezone. As obstinate, shrill and annoying as you’ve demonstrated in your participation here, I can only imagine just how pleasant you must’ve made your home life for him….

Also I suppose it was ridiculous that I would “bitch” at him for getting DUI’s on a regular basis? For getting the car sent to the impound repeated times for driving drunk? For not even KNOWING where the car was until police told him? Mind you these are at least 5 separate events I’m speaking of with the DUI.

Dear, shit happens in life. Either your with him or your against him. We all make mistakes (as you like to repeatedly say to justify why you think it’s no big deal that you created a broken home to raise your fatherless son in).

When your spouse makes a mistake, you only compound it by bitching, nagging and never letting him live it down. Now hey, he got 5 DUI’s? Maybe because after the first one, he simply didn’t want to come home after work only to hear Lady bitch at him about the DUI he got.

He also didn’t allow me to have a phone. At all. Or a car. He made sure I was stuck in the house with no car and no way to contact anyone if I went into labor. When I posed this to him he said “you can run to a neighbor’s house”. Considering he was gone all the time, I had a very good chance of delivering my baby alone, or falling at home and losing the baby and he didn’t give a shit. The abusive was just the icing on the cake. Of course I didn’t want to stay…. I knew he’d abuse my son if she was willing to hit me while preg and push me while carrying the baby.

Heh. Ok, Whiskey was right than. You choose a domineering, alpha “thug” type to be your sperm donor.

Say whatever you want, but you only know my “online debating” personality and if that’s what you’re judging my real personality on and especially in a relationship, that’s just plain old ridiculous.

I’m not judging you on your “debating” personality. We have plenty of contentious debates here amongst ourselves. No dear, the “judgment” comes from your knee jerk reaction to this blog. Your rote repeating of feminist tropes and shibboleths. Your complete inability to own up to your own mistakes and accept the fact that you created a less than optimal situation for your son. In short, you came here and sucked up most of the oxygen of this blog, and made most of the discussions all about you.

Fine. Most of us have accommodated you.

So basically you think I somehow TURNED him into an ABUSER and a DRINKER even though his own family was the same way???

According to your story, he never hit you until you were living together for a year and he started drinking heavily. You used that as your rationale when the commenters here first noted that YOU CHOSE HIM IN THE FIRST PLACE. You played the “I didn’t know he was abusive until he CHANGED!”

If he was an ABUSER and a DRINKER before you even moved in with him, why did it take him a year to finally hit you?

Go to any psychologist with that and see if they agree that an abuser is made by a woman who complains too often. Yes the medical community certainly is holding a huge secret under their hat, aren’t they??

The point that you simply are ignoring is this:

IF he was a chronic, serial abuser, as you claim…than why did it take him an entire year before he finally hit you?

If, as you first claimed, that you didn’t know he was like that, until AFTER you moved in with him and you were pregnant…than it’s obvious that he wasn’t always a heavy drinker and an abuser.

single mom who looks ten years older than her age:Also I suppose it was ridiculous that I would “bitch” at him for getting DUI’s on a regular basis?

DUIs on a regular basis? sounds like you really know how to pick ’em. but then what more can we expect from a low class myspace tramp?

I am also not delusional and realize one day my son WILL ask why I picked a “loser” and I’ll have to answer that I am only human and made a mistake.

“your father is a loser, son. half your DNA is a mistake.”

yeah, that’ll go over real well, mom.

ps your worst sin is that you’re a complete bore. no wonder your ex drank himself into a stupor and tried to end it all by wrapping his car around a tree. too bad you couldn’t use some of that “mentalism” you picked up in a community college class to persuade him to stop boozing.

I would like to assume that every one of your presises and conclusions are correct, for the sake of argument. The reason that I want to assume these things is because there is a much more fundamental question.

Why should I care about saving the United States?

What is in if for me? And by that I mean what is in it directly for me? Will I make more money? Get more pussy? Get higher on new and interesting drugs? Live longer?

Sure, it would be nice to be a superhero, save the world and do the right thing, but then again it would be nice to have a money tree or a flying car. Sure, it would be nice.

But is it even possible and, if it is, why would I want to?

I do not tilt at windmills, I do not volunteer and I have no problems leaving any country to live somewhere else once I get enough money. Give me some good reasons to please. Seriously.

And this mindset is the mindset betas will adopt in the future. All those people who made this mindset will soon be screaming for people like his poster to do his duty and he will just sit by and let them reap what they have sown. As Morpheous said, fate is not without a certain sense of irony.

@ Ovid: You are right. We cannot wind it back. We can only prolong the collapse. It took hundreds of years for the Roman empire to collapse, remnants still remained almost a thousand years after. They tried saving what could not be saved. It is in our best interests and the interests of any future generations to destroy modern civilisation as fast as possible so that we can start again.

@ Pupu: You do no understand. We cannot reverse what has been done, we can only prolong the collapse. Better to speed it up.

@ maurice: Hordes may have overcome Rome, but the people of the Roman empire still existed, so they must have eventually become barbarians themselves to survive.
Secondly, I do think the fall of America (followed by the rest of the West) will lead to invasion by other countries, such as China, Russia, or islamic hordes. When this happens you will see a lot og young men not bother to fight for their country, feeling no sense of duty towards it. Then it will descend into barbarism. All those SWPL types seem to think that America has no external threat, that the world is peaceful. They sit there happily undermining the America way of life has kept peace and warded off external threats by being the biggest and strongest nation on earth. People of other nations (and America) are no less barbarous than they were, they are just keep in check by having a strong country keeping the word in check, and a strong way of life (in America) keeping the country in check. And that system is crumbling. As the country begins to fall apart internally than external enemies (who most Americans aren’t even aware of as enemies) are going to move in. Expect another war, probably a world war, where countries try to sort out who is going to fill the spot of top dog left by America.

Secondly, you talked about the different types of religion that sprung up as Rome fell. Look at the pseudo-religious organisations we have today. We have climate change crusaders, political correctness worshippers et al who all have the stench of dogma, fervour and unquestionable moral superiority. It is religion in a different guise. Also, there has been a return to traditional faiths, more people converting to islam, more people thinking themselves superior as they grasp at zen and buddhism, stupid religions such as scientology springing up, and finally you have the simpering, idiotic ”I’m not religious, I’m spiritual crowd” who are probably modern day pagans and just as dumb and religious as other groups.

If you want an example of men not bothering to be part of society then look up Men Go Their Own Way (MGTOW) and ghosting.

@ Celtic: Feminists have already started the crusade to stop mail order brides. There was legislation passed which restricted international dating websites in America, or something similar. Maybe somebody can find the story. I have already heard grumblings on the net about female outrage over this and attempts at shame. It is probably more widespread than we know, but the major media outlets (feminised to hell) are keeping a lid on it. They don’t want beta males to know about it.

@ maurice again: I think leftism is becoming more and more like a religious movement. They used to delcare bush the devil etc. It is like a religion that justifies their self hate and their need to impose their views on others.

@ Dave is Certainly Knowing: True and well said.

@ Whiskey: I agree that thuggery is going to become commonplace. Gangs and wannabe tough guys are starting to appear in Australia. The American ghettos are probably good examples of what is to come.

@ Obsidian: The scenes you described are exactly what I think will become commonplace.

@ Chuck. Worker bee men go off to war with the unstated understanding that they are fighting for a society that is worth dying for. A society where a man can get married and raise kids and have a decent life. Who would fight for a society where you have nothing; work for no reason, have no chance of a girl or raising kids.

The short answer is that she knew who he was all along. It’s why she chose him in the first place.

He didn’t “turn evil” like some Buffy the Vampire Slayer character. She didn’t drive him to drink. He was always like that. She just figured she could … CHANGE HIM. Control him. With her magical powers of sex. To put it politely.

The fact that she’s probably a distant, Allentown Irish relative probably depresses me as much as herself.

As a Medical Professional I can tell you that no one, after a few years of experience, believes anything we hear regarding “abuse:. If there is an injury, then treat it. Otherwise; it is just noise.
I do not see you as a bad person. In your own way, your are being as honest here as you are capable. And, your attitude seems entirely representative of your age & gender.
What stands out, however, is that you display boredom approaching contempt towards the type of guy who would be (would have been) a good, stable father to your kid. THAT is significant. That teaches men an important lesson, one you seem reluctant to hear.
The future will not be like the past.

You’re probably right, Whiskey…but I was merely contrasting her earlier claims when everyone first called her out on taking responsibility for choosing the sperm donor in the first place, to which she pleaded she didn’t know… “he just changed, and started drinking and hitting me!”

She claimed to have lived with him for a year before he ever hit her. That doesn’t sound like a “chronic abuser” to me…but rather a guy who was pushed over the edge with a lady who obviously doesn’t know when to keep her mouth shut.

Mostly, however, female leaders are terrible, because they lack any and all understanding of men.

I thought most females leaders WERE men.

too late for romance

Why should I care about saving the United States?

#1 You can’t do it anyway
#2 Why would you even want to take up such a task?
#3 Save yourself. If you can’t do that, why even think about it?

I know why collegeboy likes me. I’d rather get laid to Fight Club than talk politics. The good life begins with the individual. All this talk about “society” is just so much b.s. when it all boils down to individuals. I say “save” yourself and the rest will follow and even if it doesn’t it won’t matter.

I take completely the opposite of Dave in Hawaii. Most of the women, often smart, beautiful and professional ones, in abusive relationships knew the guys were poison from the start.

To be fair, she did try to cover her ass by portraying his abuse as coming from out of nowhere. In which case, DFH’s analysis would be spot on.

Of course it’s just as likely that your analysis is the correct one, and Lady Rain is doing what Thug-Lovers have always done:

Turn a blind eye to her man’s thuggishness and intimidation as long as it was directed at other men, and only when she gets a taste of what was there all along does she THEN start crowing about his abuse.

“Not necessarily. If average herbs and betas simply start acting like assholes to women, women would start finding them attractive.”

If women are biomechanically determined to select for alpha status then women are going to keep adapting to game to make sure they’re still only selecting those who appear to be alpha males. If alphas and betas all start acting like assholes, women won’t use it as selection criteria anymore.

I’ve come around to Chuck’s viewpoint. Game is zero sum as long as the societal conditions that have created the current soft polygamy remain unchanged.

I disagree with the Prediction of the the future, but I agree 100% with the Solution!

Agree:
–> I like to say that GAME how men have adapted to all the changes in Western mating culture.

—————————————-
Disagree:

–>Unfortunatly Randall Parker is ignoring the political and historical trends on population and demographics in China. To be exact, China will face a shortage of working age population, just all Japan, S. Korea, and all Western Countries are facing. And will be forced to rely on Immigration to compensate.

–>Also Randall igonores the sort off “cultural Darwinism” that occurs throughout Human history. If the trends established in the 60’s, and new ones to come (ei: robot sex toys) of Western mating culture continue to lead to lower population growth. Then eventually the culture/s that promote population growth and technological advancements will be dominant (ei: Islam, Hinduism)

Actually, any action movie based on a real-life nuclear war would be pretty boring compared to WWII movies. A bunch of white men sitting around in a room deciding whether or not they want to push a button to blow up half the world

Not QUITE as entertaining as storming beaches and blowing up tanks, or so I would think😉

“If women are biomechanically determined to select for alpha status then women are going to keep adapting to game to make sure they’re still only selecting those who appear to be alpha males. If alphas and betas all start acting like assholes, women won’t use it as selection criteria anymore.”

Matt Ridley in “The Red Queen” makes an interesting point. In nature, males take one of two routes to seducing females: the dandy route or the bruiser route. The two strategies come down to “wooing” or “winning”.

roissy,

to your point, the problem, again, is asymmetrical information. if a man simply *acts* like an alpha, using PUA techniques w/o the bona fides to back it up, he is “fooling” the female. once she and other females realize that they’ve been duped, they will adapt. on the other hand, *everything* a female has to offer, in the way of reproductive success and ability can be seen in her beauty.

men will always select for beauty since unlike game, beauty can’t lie.

Is soft polygamy really that bad? It sucks for some but for the winners for the system it is great. Of course the real question is whether or not it is good for society.

I think it would suck for society if we condemn the modern polygamists, i.e. Bill Clintons of the world- those rare alpha men who actually aren’t 100% stupid thug crooks. We will end up a smarter and better looking society if successful men do not suffer the social and financial stigma of fathering dozens of children.

“We will end up a smarter and better looking society if successful men do not suffer the social and financial stigma of fathering dozens of children.”
Sure, but you have to ask yourself whether it is the “natural alphas” who are driving success or the betas busy designing the cure for cancer.

There are a million people in this country with an IQ above 140. Some are burnouts, some end up shooting themselves, some are just lazy as hell etc. How many MORE do we want to lose because they are pissed they can’t get women? How many are we going to have actively working AGAINST us as terrorists, and then we have to assign OTHER smart people to hunt THOSE ones down?

not all men have to practice game for “game saturation” to take place. the smoke signals of game will show on the horizon to women much sooner than that.

i’m living in wichita, kansas, the last bastion of non-gamed bars and i’m seeing guys run shitty routines that get them nowhere, and i’m seeing chicks that have already heard the same routines.

the thing is, the target will always be moving. women talk. one chick will tell her friends “oh my god, you won’t believe what this guy said to me…..”

it’s not that game can’t work, it’s that humans adapt, quickly. it is guys like roissy or tyler durden that will *always* succeed with game alone. they are the ones that are either natural alphas or have the drive to learn the newest game tactics. as i’ve said a million times, and i’m starting to annoy *myself*, the numbers of successful and non-successful men follows a set ratio.

“No one is discussing Roissy’s post. We are all discussing LR’s failed relationship with her baby-daddy”

Because he couldn’t resist a cheap shot. To the extent that a post is a pick up attempt (and lively discussion of the topic the pay off), this one failed. Never give an attention whore a chance to make themselves the topic of conversation.

I will make a couple of points:

– a lot of commentors (and Roissy) seem to be taking a nuclear family model as a default model for men and women. But the nuclear family model is exceedingly rare among pre-industrial societies and can be maintained _only_ by the right environmental conditions (such as those that made a nuclear model feasible for Eskimos) or by widespread adherence to an ideology or religion that legitimizes it (esp the latter as almost all religions are about getting people to act against human nature).

– the nuclear family does NOT represent traditional family values, it represents the breakdown of traditional family values. It’s an inherently unstable unit that cannot help but break down into smaller and more diverse forms.

– the probable default model of human existence is a big extended family with a fairly high degree of sexual segregation (women and children spend most of their time together men spend most of their time together) although neither men nor women are naturally inclined toward monogamy this arrangment makes straying more difficult in many ways since no one is by themselves that much (and men are monitored by other men and women by other women – it’s much harder to fool one’s one sex about fooling around than a spouse)

Wrong. For the hunter-gather phase, monogamy was mostly the rule, living fairly “flat” and not much polygamy. Very close to the current European model nuclear family. That was from about the emergence of early modern behavioral humans (70-50K years ago) to about 11,000 years ago with the emergence of agricultural or pastoral societies.

It’s only been recently that the agricultural resources to make polygamy possible have created a non-nuclear family.

What stands out, however, is that you display boredom approaching contempt towards the type of guy who would be (would have been) a good, stable father to your kid. THAT is significant. That teaches men an important lesson, one you seem reluctant to hear.

Could somebody explain this in phenomenon in depth? It seems that a group of alpha males and betas with game are trying to get this woman to marry a man that she’d obviously drive crazy due to her distaste for beta males. Given that none of you would want her, why would you want to subject another man to such a problematic situation, or put her son in a position where instead of simply living alone with mommy, he gets to see mommy and daddy fight which makes marriage look awful for him, and creates a future jackass who wants nothing to do with long-term relationships?

whiskey, extended family =/= polygamy, most foragers find it useful to group together for lots of reasons. Six women together looking for edible roots will usually find more than six individual women and one woman’s lack of success in finding food can be mitigated (and childcare is much, much easier when spread out among a group of women). For hunting, it depends on the game. In the amazon, game is small and group hunting will usually not succeed, on the other hand you generally need a group to take down a ruminant.

while a kind of monogamy is the norm for foragers and children know who their parents are the nuclear family isn’t an autonomous economic unit, people lived in larger family-social groups and husbands and wives don’t spend so much time together.

The big problem with a nuclear family model is that people will belong to two different nuclear families, the one they’re born into and the one they form and if each is an autonomous unit it’s too easy for conflicts of loyalty to appear. The extended family model (with monogamous couples living in larger family environments) don’t face that problem as much.

Also, somehow, part of the current Western nuclear family model incorporated the idea that the married couple should mimic the behavior of a courting couple many years (and children) into the relationship. That’s a dumb idea, doomed to failure and the result of much human unhappiness.

What happens to people when they get something, a car, money, a TV? They want more of it. Humans are utility maximizers. More is better than less. Yes, beta males fulfilling their love lives will settle society while that happens. But has nature and/or society ever been static? No. Man will seek more. Those men who are descended from beta males will seek to gain as much power as they can, and one favorite currency of that power is women. There is a constant struggle to maximize any scarce resource as men struggle to sort out who is dominant. So the battle lines are already drawn as they have been for tens of thousands of years. It’s alpha versus beta. The faces will change, but the numbers will be the same.

As roissy says, there will be no beta utopia. I take the point that beta males will have no dog in the fight, therefore large scale war is not the solution. I was merely trying to come up with an example to drive home the point that beta males are stuck.

The collapse of Rome was precipitated by the greatest voluntary withdrawal of Betas in history; the mass exodus of Christian males to the Egyptian wilderness to become ascetics. Eventually to become known as the Desert Fathers.

Doug, when I mentioned making her life a living hell if need be, I had in mind one time I was called upon to do that.

My main girl kept trying to keep me as a monogamous mate, and it was driving me batty. Seriously irritating. I just didn’t feel that way about her, and felt she had no claim on me that way. No matter how hard I tried to get space, she persisted and persisted so I had no choice but to start to mistreat her, in order to get her to back off.

Finally she got it through her head that she had no choice and no option in the situation. Either she’d give me the freedom I demand, or her life would be a living hell. I would make myself useless to her as a boyfriend if she demanded me to be monogamous.

Since then we get along much, much better. She’s my homesteader #1 right now.

As for dealing with tempestuous women, if you read my blog post of three years ago, I think you’ll find in it all the elements mentioned here.

Rarely are serious escalations required, and when they are they are usually brief. But there are also cases where escalation is required – to the point of brinksmanship.

@ Tood. I am not a feminist brainwashed beta anymore. The only thing islam has right is that it keeps women in line. Thats why feminists hate it and you love it. Everything else that comes with it, such as the strict religion, close minded thinking and obediance, and inability to progress would cause it to be a living hell for someone like me. I am very intelligent and love philosophy, innovation and technology.

@ Cliff: You are right when you say the nuclear family is a false, modern creation. When I look at my own family I notice I am close to my relatives and my family could be to some extent considered an extended family. There is plenty of co-operation.

I think gang culture is an attempt to have this sort of extended family atmosphere.

Yes, and I think it’s hysterical a civilization ruining white trash piece of dog shit like yourself is getting so much male attention on Roissy’s blog. Live it up, dirtbag. You’ll be irrelevant as soon as they all realize your knoboes are probably resting on your knees. Oh, go ahead and argue with that: it will demonstrate how you value yourself. It certainly ain’t as a mother.

“Go to any psychologist with that and see if they agree that an abuser is made by a woman who complains too often”

—you mean the feminized Oprahfied therapy sessions, which are run via left-wing politics, not science?

I’ll take a pass.

When psychologists aren’t bullied about by special interest groups and genuinely do scientific work—like say, oh, investigating sexual orientation reassignment, instead of their cowering before the LGBT thugs—-come talk to me, woman.

Am not too sure about the too close to home comment. I will say that after looking at her blog site, I’m guessing she got scorched by some man/men and is in self protect mode with barriers way up. The body language piece rings a few bells, for sure.

As far as weighing in, it’s a bit on the heavy side for me at this particular point. One thing we do not seem to have in common; she chose to be a single mother. I did not and never would have. At least not deliberately. Super woman I am not, but lucky for me I have a very good relationship with my daughter and NO regrets.

A dystopia (from the Greek δυσ- and τόπος, alternatively, cacotopia,[1] kakotopia, cackotopia, or anti-utopia) is the vision of a society in which conditions of life are miserable and characterized by poverty, oppression, war, violence, disease, pollution, and/or the abridgement of human rights, resulting in widespread unhappiness, suffering, and other kinds of pain.

Don’t you know we create our own reality? Why concern yourself so much with what others create for themselves? It’s just a big tragic distraction. Giving your attention to this kind of crap only insures you’ll experience it yourself. Sure, it’s interesting. To a point, but you use the word “dystopia” so often, I finally had to look it up.”

Sara I,

Roissy, as typical of a man is considering the greater human condition. You, typical of a woman, want him only to consider the personal.

How could philosophy, psychcology, anthropology (even Roissy’s blog) or any other field ever have evolved with such a suggestion?

Well, at least with your sentiments, you can happily and ignorantly live in your own personal ‘utopia’.

PUAs are now part of a global decentralized, leaderless movement against the progressive left.

We also need some form of political jiujitsu that makes the left openly accept polygamy under their own belief system.

What needs to happen is for some dominant black alpha male to acquire a harem of many white women. Give it plenty of media attention. Have the braindead conservative types get up in arms about it (from the angle of ‘traditional marriage’), then the lefties will come in to defend the situation under various causes like racism, or sexual freedom.

From there on in the floodgates are open for alphas to acquire harems, as the progressive left have to accept it, otherwise they are undermining parts of their own ideology.

You are sparring but don’t understand the fight; the post was heartfelt and was constructive criticism (as classically understood).

Furthermore, a “religious” person would understand (albeit “understanding” is seldom the primary purpose of blogs/comments, which you exemplify perfectly) that my post was, indeed, extremely “religious.”

I’ll slink off now but will continue to hope (even pray) for you, your ilk, and most importantly, your son. Please give my words a ponder. You are missing much more than that which you see and hear, and confidently call “good life.”

AJ Travis:
If you made coherent points, I’d be happy to deal with whether I disagree with them or not. If you’re saying institute terrible punishments for infidelity for, yes, both genders then that is something I get on board with.

A creepy stare is a sign of mental illness, classically. I’m not sure if it’s newly developed in mentally balanced people due to social norms etc. but that seems to be me a good biologically-instituted indicator for ‘Stay away from him’. Looking at that extreme, social skills are highly biologically valued by women for a reason.

I’ve tried nice and I’m quite convinced it doesn’t really exist in a majority way in the whole group that make up betas; ‘nice’ just seems to be a modern way of applying a sympathy label for ‘loser’ and for him to make himself feels like he has value. He’s too lazy or stupid or both to be anything, so ‘nice’ is how he distinguishes himself (Case in point: more and more, if you are a modern doctor, you can get away with being not really competent if you are nice to who you’re doing it to and ethical. That’s how it works. You can only get away with being an ass if you’re good and skillful.). A man who occasionally hurts my precious delicate feelings (oh me, oh my! not really) and lifts weights is much ‘nicer’ than a fat loser who doesn’t value me well enough to stop saying sorry long enough to actually get off the couch and do something worthy. The ideal, ideal situation is a man who can deal with everything and rarely has anything to need to say sorry for; provider and master both.

This ties in with my main points of dispute with you:
a) your definitions and implementations are deluded, including classifying alphas as by definition amoral, ignoring sexual harassment laws at work and being shiftless non-contributors in the workplace. You are substituting Men You Hate with Men Who Are Alpha.
b) your obsession with cheating seems to be pathological and violent.
c) You hate women and their sexuality, basing it on their worst behaviours.
d) With above points contributing, you make a bunch of hot air speeches about betas rising. The only “betas” who rise — and that includes you — are the ones you find in divorce courts. Gee, though, aren’t those the men that most militantly back up and inform the PUA movement? What you seem to be saying is darkly threatening that the betas will discover their inner darkness, turn into a mob and burn down the villages. Have you seen the average beta? Unlikely, to say the least.
e) If you wanted change, you’d talk about actually doing something, actually influencing something. Rather than just give us a taste of Bitter. What do you want? A larger pool of hot women for long-term relationships? Then fight the McDonald’s culture, spread religion, spread tradition, introduce foreign competition (re: the constant theories that Islam is going to invade via reproductive force alone). You seem to gleefully anticipate and embrace the idea of a return to much more conservative beliefs. The ‘alpha’ and ‘beta’ label hinders your points and clouds your delivery.
f) Social change does not happen by being angry at a group of people. Blood and tears does. Your motivation is revenge, punishment and perhaps justice. But not change. Not the greater good.

A man who stands up and truly fights is not and can never be beta on the whole. Which is why you have written failure into your definition, thus you need to change it. Perhaps it’s just simply the classic pattern of strong men fighting over women, amoral vs moral — both alphas — pushing for different models of living. The war between the values and rules that allow for short-term serial relationships and the ones that support long-term lasting ones, fought by two types of men that can both get women but the latter wanting quality over quantity, thus wanting not to share their spoils, as it were.

Interesting thread. Particularly like the illumination of experience of Dave from Hawaii. Sometimes social conditioning runs flat straight into reality and at least thankfully in this case, one has a good story to illustrate.

Not going to suggest the end of the 19th amendment, an interesting concept that will not be taken seriously but it’s a funny way to see the rebound affect in people’s minds here to even discuss it as a basis to address the inequity in divorce/custody laws.

As for the hijacking of the thread by Lady Weeping, I’m going to say a few things that would appear obvious to those who still retain a moral compass. First, a woman should not be getting pregnant outside of marriage, end of story.

A child brought into the world deserves a well thought out planned acceptance into this world. Weath isn’t required, but a family commitment is and the lack of seriousness on the matter and the exploding out of birth rates for all US demographics is the largest symptom of a greater disease.

Living with a guy is one thing. Going ahead and getting pregnant with marriage only “under discussion” is quite another. If this mechanic in this case brought home five DUIs, well shouldn’t there have been some seriousness that he wasn’t father material say after DUI number two?

Chic Noir makes some superb points on maturity of women here. Coming from a woman that’s a strong tonic. But she gets it right. The unfortunate reality is that US media/culture or the lack thereof has almost completely made marriage and family a concentric act where the woman is the sun. As we all know this is not only unnatural but dangerous on many levels.

Last, we all should account for the spiritual component of what attracts people to each other. Water has a tendency to find its own level. Pour it from one glass to another the motion will shake but it will level. It always does.

Lady weeping, you need to ask yourself the question of why you were attracted to a guy who would fail you in such a way. This is not about blame. But many people have commented with you about this issue or that but there’s two that are perhaps the most important: how one chooses a mate and what one does to ensure the best environment for a child.

Apparently you have addressed the latter, albeit in a limited way (yet to see you address the pathology of children raised without fathers) but what would be useful is for you to examine what was lacking in you to choose someone who would grow into failing the basics of being a man, a husband and a father. The answer believe it or not lies within you.

The studies I’ve seen on boys growing up without fathers is also something that shouldn’t be so easily dismissed either.

“PUAs are now part of a global decentralized, leaderless movement against the progressive left.”

I don’t know. The only two whose writing I’m famililar with are Roissy who seems like a classic sociopath (untroubled by any need for other human beings except to satisfy his short term desires) and Roosh (damaged goods with mommy issues).
The self-described ‘alpha’ commentors mostly sound like 13 year olds talking trash about how tuff they are.

I’m not a fan of Lady Rain overall, but she ain’t hijacking the thread. People are honing in on her and ganging up on her with personal attacks and insults and questions about her past. Of course she’s going to respond. Hijacking is when something is taken from you against your will. You guys are intentionally engaging her, making you accomplices in the hijacking if anything. Stop asking her questions, insulting her, calling her names, theorizing about her psychology and the thread won’t be about her any more. It’s that simple.

“idea that the married couple should mimic the behavior of a courting couple many years (and children) into the relationship. That’s a dumb idea, doomed to failure and the result of much human unhappiness.”

@Cliff —

The issue here is how to maintain monogamy without some of the courtship behaviors you mention.

Roissy,
though you are twisted in your reasoning on how to save our culture, you are not wrong about where we are headed…and forgive me for not reading through if I am redundant but:

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with a result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by dictatorship. The average age of the world s greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence:
From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to selfishness;
From selfishness to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependency;
From dependency back into bondage. ”
— The Decline and Fall of the Athenian Republic
Alexander Fraser Tyler (1748 – 1813)

Developing thoughts on misogyny: Invention occurs by everyone to make whatever work they’re doing easier and doesn’t need a genius. There’re different gender values for what’s important and women traditionally occupied different roles from men, which is where most of their invention and creativity occurs. The genders may be different but they are symbiotic and complimentary, essential to the nourishment and achievement of each other, they both do their respective ‘jobs’ exceedingly well. I would not advocate the banishment of either gender to the ethers, nor suppressing either their capabilities. You get geniuses who’re women and useless people who’re men and vice versa. Regardless of the actual numbers in either group, a good social system would be able to enable the proper treatment of both and allowing them to be where they meritocratically belong. That can be the case — and has been implemented to my knowledge — in Islamic theory and I’m sure it occured in other societies as well. Some female children of these polygamous, don’t-give-a-damn Gulf men are freeloading off the cash and capitalising on beauty, some are choosing to do subjects like law simply because they’re interested in it.

whiskey: an individual relationship that needs violence can be argued to not be worth having, true. But in a wider social context, you overall improve fidelity if the collective consciousness is very much aware There Are Severe Consequences. Humans very much adapt to become what they can within the restrictions of what it is reasonable and self-serving for them to be without consequences. But it is undeniable you get people with better self-discipline and stricter values if they are within a climate that calls for this.

Lady Brainless is not a victim here. She would be wise to spend her time taking care of herself and her son rather than obfuscating Roissy’s points and preventing struggling beta males from learning how to game.

She’s a hypocrite. Like many women she objects to beta males learning game and how to be edgy, and yet she had a child with a bad boy with multiple DUIs. So many nice guys — who played by society’s rules, getting an education and earning decent money — would have been more than happy to take this loser’s place. But something about a guy with multiple DUIs attracted Lady Brainless over the many other eligible men. And now she comes here to hate on those who’ve been at the fringes of society who are finally realizing that playing by the rules means you lose.

I don’t think that if eugenics were not used Fajardo and Bandido wouldn’t be born. The use of eugenics saves the producers from the costs associated with the extreme left side of the bell curve, in overall genetics.

But it also creates lots of health problems, that boom in old age, making the costs of bulls and horses explode ( that’s why the normal bull is castrated before 1 years and killed at 2, to prevent health problems associated with testosterone and old age). And it also creates an explosion in homosexualism among bulls. fags are almost unknown among the mixed breds, but it is common among the lineages that have been subject to genetic selection the most

AJ Travis: By that logic, some woman in Saudi Arabia is also part of this unjust society which I have somehow been part of (which society are we talking about, the US? SWPL? The One in Your Paranoid Dreams? God knows?). Virtues of sheer biology? By that logic, you are your own enemy. ALL men are guilty as well, especially since THEY gave away power THEY had.

What change are you talking about and how is it going to be affected, because there are the betas you are targeting reading? Are you going to wipe out all females, especially the ones who have the arrogance to speak to you?

Maybe I’d surrender, if I knew WHAT IT WAS I WAS SURRENDERING TO:
AJ TRAVIS: ‘Surrender!’
Me: ‘Er, to what? Whom? How? Where?’
AJ TRAVIS: ‘Surrender! YOUR BLOOD IS MINE!’

Anyway, your continuing deluded and paranoid response means you have lost contact with reality and/or are a troll.

Thank you for telling me this in explicit terms. So long, and thanks for all the hot air.

AJ Travis: By that logic, some woman in Saudi Arabia is also part of this unjust society which I have somehow been part of (which society are we talking about, the US? SWPL? The One in Your Paranoid Dreams? God knows?). Virtues of sheer biology? By that logic, you are your own enemy. ALL men are guilty as well, especially since THEY gave away power THEY had.

What change are you talking about and how is it going to be effected, because there are the betas you are targeting reading? Are you going to wipe out all females, especially the ones who have the arrogance to speak to you?

Maybe I’d surrender, if I knew WHAT IT WAS I WAS SURRENDERING TO:
AJ TRAVIS: ‘Surrender!’
Me: ‘Er, to what? Whom? How? Where?’
AJ TRAVIS: ‘Surrender! YOUR BLOOD IS MINE!’

Anyway, your continuing deluded and paranoid response means you have lost contact with reality and/or are a troll.

Thank you for telling me this in explicit terms. So long, and thanks for all the hot air.

You and your ilk have declared war on me, and I am going to win that war. You will be forced to change against your will.

I think you need to check your ego, hun. Please! One cannot “win” any war unless your definition of winning is more misery brought upon yourself. If we could win by attacking we would all be winners. If we could win by forcing our will, we would all be sitting pretty. Perhaps you watch too many movies or not enough.

The point is not “going back to a “dick-dippin’, no child support-paying, women in the homes” world. Empathy is often difficult to cultivate, conjoined with the ability to sit in the center and really look, unmoved, at multiple sides of an issue. If one benefits from the present order than unless that person is unusually perceptive, he or she may miss the downside, or if they DO notice the downside tend to downplay its significance. “life isn’t fair, society never was” isn’t the point. We are not talking about fairness, rather something more fundamental and dangerous related to our social survival. And people just don’t get this.

The way you phrase some things shows you do not fully see why people have very real objections to the state of things now. A good deal of this is that you frankly benefit from it a bit. Many of us do, by degrees. It is hard to look a gift golden horse in the mouth and see that it’s really only gilt plaster.

Women and Men have differing biological and emotional priorities when it comes to children, sometimes complementary, sometimes adversarial – culture can cultivate one side of things, or it can tragically cultivate another side of things.

… something happened last night, bringing home abstract words into a hammer hitting my rib cage – I an angry, pissed, and saddened and might blog about it once my mind is still enough to write with civility, because right now it isn’t… Less than a mile down the hill from where I sit now, a few hours ago in the late night, early morning, a three year old girl was raped, and shot in the head, as a direct consequence of the carefree libertine whoring sexual lifestyle enjoyed by the baby’s mother. The baby was raped by one of the mother’s many pissed off “alpha” thug boyfriends. The guy was probably drunk, possibly stoned, and left alone while his bitch went out to part and shake her booty, left alone with another man’s child. This man, a young, hyper-testosterone, hard criminal, drunk on absurd amounts of malt liquor, likely a previous murderer with almost no empathy in his heart – a feral wolf – decided for fun and kicks to pull a three year old girl’s pant’s down, rape the little girl with his cock until she was half comatose, and then take a gun and blow a hole in that baby’s head.

Lest you think this is an exception, I know of many other equally horrific cases. And lest someone make this into a race discussion, some of these cases happened in trailer parks. Some horrific things happen in White trash and Black trash neighborhoods alike, and for that matter Mexican trash a little further north of me, but that’s a tangent I don’t even want to touch now.

The only thing, and I am pissed enough to freely admit this, is that this sort of decadent depraved evil debased human shit does seem to occur more often in the local ghettos than in the local trailer parks or white trash urban neighborhoods. It happens in both, men raping little girls, while babysitting them, but actually shooting them in the head is mostly a prerogative of ghetto thugs. Also oddly I rarely hear ghetto stories of raping little boys, and I hear much more of that from the trailer parks, but even in this case at least they don’t wind up shot. I have my hypothesis as to why this is the case, they are inconvenient and frankly my head hurts too much to even go into them. That said the basic point is that at the lowest points in our social hierarchies, white and black, there is an epidemic of boyfriends of sluts and whores visiting extreme sexual violence on the slut’s offspring while the sluts are off, well, slutting it up in a bar or club or someone’s back seat.

A veritable shite-storm ‘o human depravity all aided and abetted by the licentiousness of the times. I do not exaggerate, anyone who thinks I do is naïve, or willfully ignorant, I can tell you of things that would haunt your dreams for weeks.

I want to avoid race debates – suffice to say this sort of madness is defused across our culture on a certain level, similar things happen in trailer parks as well as in ghettos. I used to date a girl who was profoundly Fucked up in the head (I didn’t realize when I first met her) because of some really messed up stuff her drunk ex-cop of a father used to do to her when she was really young, mostly out of disdain for the girl’s mom acted out on the body of the girl and her mother.

I have a friend who grew up in a local trailer park, she and her brother had a lifetime of mental issues because of some really depraved stuff done to both of them in their childhood, in their homes. She’s emotionally and psychologically healed a great deal. Her brother, who when he is stable is a really great guy (and extremely intelligent, IQ in the high 130’s) on the other hand is often a basket case, and even when sane occasionally repeats abusive weirdness on various girlfriends (the guy once got drunk, beat his lil girlfriend, and then ordered her to suck off and serially fuck 7 of his friends during a card game. Why? Some sort of power play. He got off on it..)

So if you really want to debate, then debate class. And even still you would be missing the point. The point is that the ramifications of extreme sexual licentiousness on a widespread societal level grow more severe as wealth and social prestige decreases, because you cannot subsidize and offset the harmful effects of sluttage anymore, the tolerance is gone, you are left with hard cruel facts of human nature, biological – and for me spiritual. Middle class virtues and values are middle class for a reason. The middle classes often have the most to benefit from virtue, and owe their stations in life by cultivating virtues.

Is that another way of saying, ‘If I’m allowed to be a shriek as long as I want without being shamed, I’ll be happy because I got what I want.’

Sort of but not exactly. Instead it’s like “I’ll be happy because I got to offload a ton of shit:. Big difference. The problem is 99.9% of men simply cannot believe it could be that simple. Try it next time you have a hysterical/unhappy/bitchy woman on your hands. Keep your advice and any and all well meaning and highly intelligent comments to yourself. When she’s vented for awhile and has paused for a few breaths of air. Ask her, “Is that all?” Then see what happens. Make sure she is EMPTY of all trash. Hold the trash bag open for her in other words. Then give her a big hug only when you’ve triple checked that she’s done venting. You’ll be amazed. Have the candles and massage oil ready. Works for me. *wink*

Kind of like saying, men are easy! If you just cook every day, clean the house, give on demand blow jobs, and never talk, we’ll be nice to you… Well yeah, obviously!

Is that a fact? Well, it doesn’t work on all men. I had one who should have been the happiest man on the planet then. There are always exceptions.

Happiness in a relationship comes from self-control. A woman having the self-control to not vent without interruption and a man having the self-control to act like a man.

seeking alpha@“Happiness in a relationship comes from self-control. A woman having the self-control to not vent without interruption and a man having the self-control to act like a man..”

self control and self restraint is the one thing that a hedonic order stigmatizes.

It does so at its own peril, if i am an elitist in any shape of form it lies in the vaguely hypocritical notion that some people are not cut out for hedonism and virtue should, ought to be, cynically enforced and demanded of, in copious doses, people who probably would be destroyed by excessive hedonism.

Hypocritical?

Well, perhaps, I would actually call it realistic.

I’m open to an accusation of hypocrisy here. They used to say that hypocrisy is the tariff that vice pays to virtue. This presupposes the metaphysical primacy of virtue.

For the record I would actually prefer some real degree of virtue and noble behavior of everyone, but given that we are in a quantitative excessivley materialistic order anyway, clearly some folks are less cut out for hedonism than others. If you have trouble seeing long term consequences and are captivated constantly by shiny pretty things, then the “get thee to a nunnery” option is probably better for all of us in the long run..

(oh, and comment_whatever, you can regard this post as snit-fest bait for you… I actually made it easy for you to get your daily dose of vein or gasket blowing, you can thank me for my compassion later…)

I appreciate that there is a difference… it’s true. Maybe I just don’t have enough patience, but at a certain point, I cut the venting off.

For the self-control thing, here’s how I look at it. It is impossible for both people to get everything they want.

I’d rather come home and play some Halo or catch-up on work reading than hear about what cute things the five year olds did today. But if I have a little self-control and chat about the brats for a bit, I get time to myself without any complaints from her.

Likewise, she’d rather have more stuff than less stuff and better stuff than less good stuff. But if she makes few requests of my money and asks nicely, I don’t really care about the occasional purchase here and there.

Maybe those aren’t the best examples, but you get my point. You have a little self-control in indulging your desires and you get most of what you want.

Another way of saying it is the key to happiness is picking your battles. If you’re a reformed beta and you try and ‘be the alpha’ over every stupid little perceived slight, you won’t get very far (speaking from experience). If you save your ‘I’m the man, damnit!’ for the shit you actually care about, it’ll work a lot better.

While the way you worded your ideas are pretty confusing, I think we’re agreeing.

If a hedonist is addicted to pleasure, than the most successful hedonist over the long-run is someone who balances the pleasures of today with the pleasures of tomorrow.

I have friends who don’t work, or work BS jobs who are probably drinking on the beach right now. I’m kinda jealous, but I know I can join them when I get out of work, and I can spend the occasional weekend abroad.

And the same goes the other way. There are people who work their asses off in their 20s and by the time their 30s or 40s come and they have enough free time to theoretically enjoy themselves, they’ve become such miserable cunts that it defeats the purpose.

Thank you for the suggestion, but balance in all things includes me acting like a real asshole sometimes, even when it’s not warranted. None of us are perfect and I wouldn’t really want to be either. Such a burden.

Sara I@“Try it next time you have a hysterical/unhappy/bitchy woman on your hands. Keep your advice and any and all well meaning and highly intelligent comments to yourself. When she’s vented for awhile and has paused for a few breaths of air. Ask her, “Is that all?” Then see what happens. Make sure she is EMPTY of all trash…”

Two years ago I accidentally discovered the virtues of just sitting bemused and unmoving while I am being vented upon, which seemed to make it worse in the short run (“Aren’t you going to say anything damn you? – “No sweety, keep going.. tell me what you have to say..”) and result in longer tirades of ranting, but at least not feeding into her drama storm seemed to prevent feedback. But then i discovered something else by mistake,

I also discovered, with two separate ex’s, that when they are at their most hysterical and snitty, simply ignoring the tirade of insanity flowing freely out of their mouths, and standing behind them, pulling them into me, and kissing them gently on their upper shoulders and neck while caressing them up and down their fronts, teasingly, for what seemed like an eternity seemed to shut them up.. Happened once with one ex, but I just left and went home afterwards. Happened another time while she happened to be wearing short sundress, and my exploring hands discovered that I was making her very moist and engorged beyond what I’d ever imagined possible with a woman (the wonders of the female body, and mind, never fail to amaze me).

This of course made me quite excited and soon thereafter also quite engorged..

Further explorations with her bent happily over my leather sofa arm confirmed my lingering intuition that simply logically arguing with her was always simply futile, and gently penetrating and stroking into her deeply while caressing her hair was the best policy in most cases. This gentle stroking very shortly became harder, more animalistic, and the two of us annoyed the girl next door with our cries

This has worked multiple times since. I have no idea why, but I have no complaints. Why should I? The girl mentioned above once jokingly mentioned how bizarre it was none of her previous boyfriends ever figured it out. Angry sex can be hard, but it can also be soft, deep, and melt into something not quite anger, not quite lust, but more exciting, raw. Incidentally the 3 times that she and I broke up (somehow finding some excuse to get back together) sex when we broke up was unusually and painfully passionate. There is something to this, but I do not quite know what it is.

Since this appears to be the case with multiple women, in some cases leading to passionate sex, but in other cases just leading to long lingering cuddle fests with me holding her close and caressing her as she melted into my arms and finally just shut up, I believe there is something to this all…

Now that I have been quite single again, with no serious motivation right now to really date, I simply nurse these memories with amusement trying to figure them out.
When the right time comes, I will create even fonder memories with another woman, but for now, I rest, and ponder.

Doug1: Bhetti even talks about a severe beating working well in Arab culture

I was speaking about it more in the context of therapy. If a person — male or female — is not acting within social expectations of their psychological behaviour. I’m wouldn’t say it’s universally true but they can expect an escalation of violence until they stop. In those societies, it’d still be harsher on the men. The unacknowledged truth is it probably works.

Got you. I can see how a “therapy” frame is far more effective than an out of control anger frame would be. That’s never what I had in mind anyway.

Oh it’s way harsher on the men in the Angloshere too of course. The question is whether women face any penalties a lot of the time here. No fault divorce for example, where the man gets taken to the cleaners after HER infidelity transgressions. And any stiking of her is regarded as unspeakably awful by feminists and as part of PC, and significantly and sometimes severely (child visitation) punished. We’ve gone so far to the matricentric that it’s obscene — but most male frogs in the slowly warmed up Western water haven’t noticed, or have been propagandized to think it’s good, progress, and all for the best, at least usually.

If you’re an alpha, or just want to state your opinion as fact, then, sorry, but I’ll hold fast.

And I did not misread Bhetti’s intent, which was to admonish me for saying things that she didn’t like. I made no assumptions about who she was praising.

Bhetti wasn’t admonishing me. She was defending me. Several times to several people. Which was obvious. But if you don’t believe me, why don’t you ask her on here. She’ll see it eventually today the second day for this thread and tell you.

If you’re an alpha, or just want to state your opinion as fact, then, sorry, but I’ll hold fast.

I guess then you won’t be listening to what I have to say. Won’t keep me from saying it if I feel like it, since others will be listening. (Though it’s quite amusing to hear you discounting those who state their opinions as facts.)

Look, you’re only 42. Do you really want to cut yourself off from sex and intimacy with women from now on? Learn some game from here. Learn to read women better. A lot better. You can learn some of that here too. There are also the classic game books. Your revolution is unlikely except around the edges, I hope (divorce law), where you can get alphas agreeing too. Meanwhile you have a life to lead. Hopefully for you, one that involves sex and intimacy with women.

Again, there is no reason I’d blame myself for the abuse part of the relationship because I’m not an abuser, I don’t get in his face, I don’t even yell when I’m angry…. I coldly and silently ignore the person until I feel like talking.

The Silent Treatment is a very powerful form of abuse. My guess is you use it on all the men in your life, including your son.

f) Social change does not happen by being angry at a group of people. Blood and tears does. Your motivation is revenge, punishment and perhaps justice. But not change. Not the greater good.

A man who stands up and truly fights is not and can never be beta on the whole. Which is why you have written failure into your definition, thus you need to change it. Perhaps it’s just simply the classic pattern of strong men fighting over women, amoral vs moral — both alphas — pushing for different models of living. The war between the values and rules that allow for short-term serial relationships and the ones that support long-term lasting ones, fought by two types of men that can both get women but the latter wanting quality over quantity, thus wanting not to share their spoils, as it were.

Wow. Bang up comment. Tour de force. Not just the part I quote above. The whole thing.

Yeah I’m sure I can’t help but be biased, but that strikes me as one of the best female comments we’ve had on here.
Though biased, I wouldn’t perceive it that way as I do, nor would I say THAT, if it wasn’t way up there.

I’ve read all the books (Game, MM, etc.) and lived the PUA lifestyle, that’s why I know it’s a dead end for anyone who wants a meaningful relationship with a woman you can trust, but great for banging sluts. Some guys still want to pretend to be Hugh Hefner in his prime. Fine, but that’s not me anymore.

Furthermore, game only perpetuates itself — the more game practiced, the more game needed. It’s a psycho-sexual arms race. Where one side might gain the upper hand for a while, but in the end, nobody really wins.

The women I meet now, in my life, I deal with honestly. If I had to lie to them, to get them to like me, then guess what, that means the DON’T like ME.

I have no quarrel with a woman who doesn’t like me, I move on to those who do. But there are those women, like some of those who comment here, that go beyond just dislike, and actually contribute to the tyranny of not just me, but every guy who doesn’t blow their skirt up. (Betas.) I am simply showing them the logical consequences of their actions.

Anyway Lady Rain, and Sara both, what I mentioned above is a horror show. It illustrates that many people aren’t quite seeing exactly WHY some people are freaking out over what many of us see as clear social decay. The situation I mentioned above is partially the fault of Naive (and really I question their naivete, I think some have real ideological agendas) college educated feminist Child and human services social workers who unwittingly abet a good deal of real social horror. Why? I do not know but I suspect it is because they live in ideology and resentment, amidst their privileged lives, and know nothing of the real world.

Why should the system give custody of children BY DEFAULT to young demonstrably barely responsible women? The automatic assumption is that the mother is more fit. This is an assumption instilled in me for YEARS and it took years before I started questioning it. The only way in my state a man can get joint custody is with the mother’s approval or by fiat of the judge, and the judge in many cases by default rules in the mother’s favor. This is backwards.

The current sexual order is a paradise for women and men of a certain strata of society, the party beautiful people. It decays into an absurd trashy horror freak-out show in the lower classes. Take that movie where Asia Argento (yum) and Marylyn Mansion (yuck) are a couple living in a trailer park and Mansion’s ends up bloodily molesting Argento’s son…. It isn’t that far from the truth.

Take the mother of the murdered baby above – the woman was/is a serial slut, which is rather ordinary in her neighborhood, and quite probably a recreational whore who was shacking up with a “boyfriend” who she initially probably met turning tricks anyway. This, too, is also rather ordinary there – a lot of girls around those parts turn tricks by second nature, prostitution becomes some bizarre extension of regular dating / mating / fucking, after all why do it for free when you can get paid and rope a lucky client into eventually being your boyfriend and being a man around your apartment babysitting your kids while being free to go out and wolf down someone else’s cock?

Rather logical, actually..

I hear of horrors that would kill your heart. Not just in the ghettos, but in trailer parks too, white black and Latino. Through various means I often end up knowing about a lot of the city’s garbage that the newspapers usually bury. What happened to that 3 year old happens constantly, it is a direct consequence of the stupid choices in men folk many young women make.

Many girls piss on “good men” or hump and use them for their resources, while serially chain fucking men who are often below pond scum. Bedding jerks is one thing, but getting dripping wet over, seeking out and fucking, convicts and violent felons, is another.

I believe this is innate to certain woman’s sexuality. It is not a matter “low self esteem” or any other Cosmo Mag shibboleth, I’ve been with some women from really good families, for whom I was one of the most classy things they had ever been with. Stories of falling in love with sociopaths, ex felons, escaped murders on the run living in woods next to train yards, and more, are just weird if you are educated and from the upper middle classes. And yes, I’ve heard it all before from women you would probably see as classy.

So what about the girls who are not “classy”, the ones who live in a project or trailer park, who date felons and leave their 3 year olds home to be baby sat by felons with arrest warrants on their heads, guys known for murder, rape, assaulting grown adult men downtown in broad daylight on the street. “Well he’s got swag”

No, fuck that shit. That stupid mentality and predilection to fucking the scum of the earth gets multiple 3 year old kids murdered, or raped, or both, on a regular basis.

Men are biologically programmed to defend their kin, and really in many cases to give half a damn about others outside their family unit. The old generation used to know this, my grandma who grew up in the backwoods of Georgia used to freak out over the very idea of a man older than 12 babysitting, bathing, or being alone with a young girl. These people knew something about human nature that we have erased from our minds, that operates all the same.

Frankly it violently pisses me off. Because children die over this shit. Our current sexual and gender order has a cost, it may have its benefits and upsides, but it has costs, horrific costs, and failing to pay attention to the costs is social suicide. And for some in the know, and they are in the know, deliberate social homicide.

As for the two types of alpha men, there isn’t such a stark dichotomy, though it’s much easier and clearer to talk about it that way, at least on the first pass, or as the first derrivative.

That is serial (or parallel) seducing alphas can transition to long stable relationship alphas or even then to forevaeva alphas. Or the order can be mixed a bit.

As well and this is part of what you’ve talked about, there’s the socially productive type of alpha, who’s generally at least somewhat moral (but also often pragmatic) in his outlook, and the outlaw, biker, no account but macho bangs chicks, thug kind of alpha. Despite being more colorful and inexplicable in their success with women under reigning mainstream or feminist theory and hence more interesting to talk about, the later are a small minority of alphas. As YOU know.

That’s now how things are talked about on Roissy’s, especially by many of the commenters.

It’s called “passive” aggression. In my experience it’s a far more mind fucking type of aggression. Puts me right over the edge which is of course the intention of the person employing it. I prefer (a man) to call me a bitch to my face rather. THAT I can deal with. *shudders*

whiskey: an individual relationship that needs violence can be argued to not be worth having, true. But in a wider social context, you overall improve fidelity if the collective consciousness is very much aware There Are Severe Consequences. Humans very much adapt to become what they can within the restrictions of what it is reasonable and self-serving for them to be without consequences. But it is undeniable you get people with better self-discipline and stricter values if they are within a climate that calls for this.

Wisdom.

From a deeply cross cultural perspective. (I.e. the differences are large.)

No thank you. You have a pretty negative focus. Sure there are horrors in the world, but there are more not horrors if you get that. Focusing on what works, works. Focusing on what is not working, doesn’t work. It does not work in creating more of what you/we want. The universe knows only yes. Saying no to something invites it into your experience. I know, this is crazy thinking to most people, but try it. Focus on “Satan” and before you know it, you’re fucked up real good. Truths is a created thing. Trust me on this. Yeah, sure!

But the gist is: For men, being an Alpha means being a leader of men. They build successful companies, sports teams and armies, elevating those who follow them, as well as themselves. “A Patronage Network.” I think he calls it.

For Women, alpha means the guy who they want to fuck. The most socially dominant man in the room. The one all the other girls are fawning over.

These two definitions can describe the same person, or not.

Tommy Lee is a classic women’s alpha, but do you really think he could build a company? Lead men into battle?

Bill Gates is a classic men’s alpha. His company has created the most millionaires in history, but he ended up marrying his secretary, a 7 at best, in her youth:

Donald Trump, on the other hand get all kind of hot tail, and he has made many of his employees millionaires. He fits both definitions.

The pisser is that back before the female sexual dystopia, as Roissy calls it, Bill Gates would be married to a woman who was Pam Anderson hot, but did not sleep around. Which in the end would be better for not just Pam and Bill but society.

Try it next time you have a hysterical/unhappy/bitchy woman on your hands. Keep your advice and any and all well meaning and highly intelligent comments to yourself. When she’s vented for awhile and has paused for a few breaths of air. Ask her, “Is that all?” Then see what happens. Make sure she is EMPTY of all trash. Hold the trash bag open for her in other words. Then give her a big hug only when you’ve triple checked that she’s done venting. You’ll be amazed. Have the candles and massage oil ready. Works for me. *wink*

See comments above from Dave from Hawaii about being a ” calm bulwark for her tempest” to rage against, or from me about being a calm Rock of Gibralter against which her storm tossed seas can crash. Then both of us saying “feel better now” afterwards with a smile and a hug. (Well maybe we didn’t go into quite that much detail, but that’s the idea.)

I think that it really helps to define Alpha, for example A.J. has defined “alpha” as the epitome of male caddish behavior that he loathes.

Definitions matter ladies and gentlemen, we can throw the same word around and mean somewhat different things by it.

Someone who esteems male cooperation in his case rejects the urge towards mastery.

If people realized that you can have multiple masters co-existing, masters of the self, then we would see things differently. Many tribal warrior societies actually had very weak hiearchies, the chief or king was often the first among equals. Albanians used to be like this. The old bedouin Arabs as well, the tribal alpha male ended up governing by consensus among a group of dangerous men half likely to tell him to piss off as they were to listen to them. In a society of men groomed to self-mastery, dominance is a matter of degrees.

Well I didn’t offer my own definition, so you have no idea if I’m confusing it or not.

My own definition involves both. First, I think you’d find that most leaders of men are loved by women. Second, I’m under the impression Bill Gates was the brains behind the products, not the company. Ballmer would be the leader of men in that example, and I bet he could pull a cutie.

More importantly, in neither definition does berating a young English girl like a rabid dog qualify as ‘alpha’.

Both definitions would follow my three options: enjoy the bachelor life, get married but with your eyes wide open to Roissys truths, or move.

SA: Read his AJ Travis’ mad blog. Or not, perhaps you need your IQ for something important. To be fair, I provoked him and deliberately into showing his colours… let’s not play the little girl card, which I seem to make people do a lot. I’m fine, I’m fine, I don’t need to be protected despite all my aspirations at kittenhood and naiveté or whatever it is that triggers this.

Where was the protection from Doug, though? Trouble was the real danger😉

doug:

As for the two types of alpha men, there isn’t such a stark dichotomy…

It was easier to talk about it that way and, yes, a misrepresentation. I’m very well aware of the spectrum, sorry. I’ll be better.

I don’t think anyone’s addressed the fact that wanting to sow wild oats then settle down is having your cake and eating it. Aren’t they diametrically opposed? To enable one, how much do you damage the other?

Are they coexisting institutions that enable each other and need each other, or ‘enemies’?

That’s fair, but it wasn’t so much the attacks at you that annoyed me so much as a) the height to which they rose and b) the victim mentality behind them.

My point was just that little men complain about their unfair lot in life. Real men look at the facts they can’t control, and make their decisions based on what they can control. There are three reasonable paths for an American male to take with respect to women, all of which are pretty good paths.

And this mindset is the mindset betas will adopt in the future. All those people who made this mindset will soon be screaming for people like his poster to do his duty and he will just sit by and let them reap what they have sown.

That is what I have been thinking because it is the only way I can see this social situation playing out, but I am always open to new arguments against it.

All of the old incentive structures that made the US possible have been and are being removed. Why should an average schnook work everyday, pay his taxes, get hitched and have enough kids to make up for his death in the aggregate, fight when told to by his betters, and generally just obey the rules like a good serf? All of the sacrifices he would have to make to live that life are not outweighed by the benefits anymore.

Really well. I’m a quick learner and Roissy’s stuff is invaluable. First I overshot it like I described above by being too ‘alpha’ which is really not alpha at all, but just going from being an insecure loser to an insecure asshole.

I’m beginning to learn the subtleties. The ability to not only have dominance over your woman but making her enjoy the dominance by virtue of its playfulness. Kind of like the difference between a real neg and an insult.

Wedding is in August 2010 and it looks like it actually might be fun. Huge outdoor area on the water so I can pay for a guy to hand roll cigars.

How’s London? I would love to go back from a couple years. If I get fired here I think I’d look for hedge funds in Mayfair instead of Greenwich.

SA: Good to hear! It sounds like you’re the one who wants the big wedding (makes a change). Although comments here are invaluable, there’s one LTR-based website I can think of: http://takeninhand.com/ Quite heavy on the dominance but at least it has that focus.

It’s sunny in this city, for once. Not in the finance sector, most likely…

Personally I’d prefer to elope and at most send a postcard to our family and friends from Bora Bora, but if I’ve got to be at a big wedding, I’m going to make damn sure I can smoke a cigar and enjoy a nice view and a cold vodka rocks while I’m there.

Seeking Alpha-
You make me laugh. One little scrap of positive attention for a female poster and you crawl up into her lap for a pat on the head, and snap like a little puppy at anyone who bothers your mommy.

Mmmm, Travis, your bitterness… it tastes delicious. It’s a great way to wash down this turkey sandwich I’m working on.

What sorts of life experiences create that bitterness? A failed career? A cheating wife? Parents that don’t love you? Whatever it is, I promise you that yelling at people on the internet will prove at best a temporary salve.

Wow you’re slow too. I despise the female definition of alpha, as I explained, which is what is promoted on this blog. Unless I’ve overlooked Roissy’s postings on organizational structures, international patent law, or the West Coast Offense.

You think Bill Gates was studying “Sex & The Brain” in college or assembler language programming? (The Game and MM were not around then.)

First of all, show respect to your intellectual superior. You can call a bully dumb and a nerd weak, but not the other way around.

Let me break it down to two simple points you don’t seem to get.

The two definitions of alpha (followed by men, loved by women) are not mutually exclusive.

Your bitter complaints and victimhood mentality is not how either definition of alpha would act.

That’s it.

Let’s accept your (odd) argument that all of the latter alphas are terrible people. Are you suggesting that the former alpha would react by whining or yelling? Stomping his feet or crying his eyes out? Of course not.

He’d either stay a bachelor for life (yes, you can be a leader of men and still be a bachelor who sleeps with lots of women – see my first point) or he would get married to a quality woman and do his best to avoid the pitfalls of marriage Roissy describes.

No. I realized what an idiot I was for using my real name for a little while and when I chose a handle I thought this one fit nicely since I’m a trader and this blog is about becoming (a version of) Alpha.

Hah, and yes there is a bit of TJF-dejavu when arguing with Travis. If he proves incapable of reason, I’ll have to ignore him too.

Angry TravisPot, Kettle… Do you need me to finish this?
There is no spite in my words. The mental voice of my posts is not yelling but switching between playful mocking and honest help. So please, let the anger go. She was a bitch. It’s not your fault. And it’s not the dude she cheated with’s fault either (unless he was your twin brother… that would be dick).

I don’t think anyone’s addressed the fact that wanting to sow wild oats then settle down is having your cake and eating it. Aren’t they diametrically opposed? To enable one, how much do you damage the other?

Are they coexisting institutions that enable each other and need each other, or ‘enemies’?

It depends.

Once a man has flexed alpha muscles and banged a good number of women and had some fall in love with him, and realizes it’s not that hard (or for him is quite easy) in the current climate to get more, he’s unlikely to fall into utterly abandoned first love (again). (Though some men no doubt still can.) That’s not to say this makes a more mature, wiser kind of deep love impossible at all. For one thing that can very much be inspired in a man as his response to a MUCH more innocent female’s abandoned love. Yes that really happens.

As well, for reasons long time readers of this blog will appreciate, it’s very good for the long term course of a mutually loving relationship for the man to be a little more loved and a little more in control of himself and thus able to relationship game, rather than sink into relationship betatude, so encouraged by our mainstream culture these days.

If a playboy hedonist alpha really gets callous about how he habitually treats women, even the ones who aren’t hardened sluts (sluts vary a lot in their degree of hardness) but instead are good girls or relative good girls, or was that way to begin with being the thug kind of alpha, then he may well have trouble falling in love period. RooshV has described this inability to feel much for women that’s come upon him as a result of both his volume of women, and how easy it’s been for him to get them, on a one night basis usually. Yeah, that is disturbing.

Could RooshV for example regain his ability to feel by taking a hiatus, or having a sort of religious (cultural) conversion experience? Maybe. Man dependent, I’d think.

From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to selfishness;
From selfishness to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependency;
From dependency back into bondage. ”

The US is currently at approximately the complacency/apathy stage. There are still ‘Tea Party’ protests, but they are too few to make a difference.

Of course, one can eject from the US and move to one of the Asian countries, which currently are in a ‘courage’ stage, going on liberty.

I just saw that new Star trek movie, on the other day, and I wonder if Capt. Pike and Capt. Kirk epitomize the sort of differences between “alpha males” you are discussing.

Earlier Lady Rain @“My point was that foreign brides marry American men for money. …
The only thing left is money. Well I hate to break it to you, but women have their own money so the “draw” of security really isn’t there anymore either. (unless of course a woman is too lazy to want to find her own financial security).”

1. is a bad assumption, along Dave Alexander lines. Many foreign brides marry American men for stability, which can, and often does, include money (financial stability) but can, and frankly does, include other factors. Also this isn’t an exclusive motivation, people, men and women, can have complex motivations for marriage. Our modern tendency to reduce marriage to some sort of romantic arrangement misses the real, nuanced, multiple social roles and reasons for marriage existing in the first place.

– On the side, I’ve known foreign bride/american men couples who loved each other deeply, I have observed this, the cynicism of others will not convince me that what I noticed with these couples was delusional. If a large percentage of the men in your locality are half employed drunks being wooed by a stable expat is NOT a gold digging tactic, it’s simple good sense in finding a man who is socially more attractive than everyone else playing in the sandbox.

2. A problem is that in a huge percentage of the cases, this lifestyle choice is subsidized by the public, millions upon millions of single mothers work, but how many more frankly are on welfare? This happens more often then many admit. This makes the situation unsustainable, in particular in an age in which many states are frankly bankrupt.

I think that the problem is more complex than you admit, that exceptional cases do not invalidate general rules, and that if you look at it hard and close you will see my point. It is possible that you are taking your own life’s example decisions, choices, and experiences, and generalizing them. We all do this somewhat, but it’s a dangerous practice. A single mother with trade skills or a vocation or profession, and a familial support network, who is educated and financially stable is not the norm by which people are looking at things, Most women are not Murphy Brown. It is possible to look at our own situations and mistake them for the norm, in reality they may be contrary to the norm…. highly

You have a pretty negative focus. Sure there are horrors in the world, but there are more not horrors if you get that…The universe knows only yes. Saying no to something invites it into your experience. I know, this is crazy thinking to most people, but try it. Focus on “Satan” and before you know it, you’re fucked up real good. Truth is a created thing.

I like your “accentuate-the-positive” philosophy. It surely makes life more pleasant when one ignores negative or troubling aspects of the world.

For instance, Lady Rain could have paid attention, if she wanted, to the abusiveness of her child’s father when they first met and began dating. She could have paid attention to the way he intimidated *other* people in their little town. She could have speculated that such a man would be a poor choice of father.

But that would all just be negative theorizing about the future, wouldn’t it? She wouldn’t be focused on the HERE AND NOW. And after all, he was so *hot* and the sex was just so, well, *hot*.

Yes, Sara, I think Lady Rain is a fine example of your philosophy.

Don’t worry, be happy!

[*any and all resemblances in this post to Comment_Whatever’s style are purely coincidental.]

Ignoring them seems irresponsible somehow. I don’t focus only on the negative, but I strive and struggle to see both the negative and positive for what they are. To ignore one and only focus on the other seems like a polyanna approach that causes more human suffering.

I would rather see things as they are, in full, the soft and the hard, the harsh and the pleasant, than to avert my gaze from the truth.

I don’t much care if women want to have babies by alphas and raise them as single-mothers, except for the very important fact that males raised by single-mothers outside the upper classes are often forced into the gang life.

I don’t understand why the Left doesn’t see this, or else sees it and doesn’t consider it a problem.

Doug1-
“RooshV has described this inability to feel much for women that’s come upon him as a result of both his volume of women, and how easy it’s been for him to get them, on a one night basis usually. Yeah, that is disturbing.”

This was my experience. I also believe that although all women are drawn to guys who display super tight game, only a subset of them act on it, and that particular subset of women are NOT the type you want to end up with LT.

It’s a self defeating process:
I want a woman. I see guys who treat women like sluts, get a lot of women. I learn how to treat women like sluts. I get a lot of women. Ergo, most women are sluts.

It’s a wrong conclusion, because I have chosen to do what attracts the exact opposite type of woman I desire.

Complaining (Anger) is always the first step. It is the only thing powerful enough to motivate a man to take drastic action. I don’t remember the Sons of Liberty laughing and joking as they tar and feathered tax collectors or percolated Boston Harbor.

I post my complaints here so that other men who are in the same boat know they are not alone, and to present an alternative to solving our problems with a little more, well-used, pussy.

Step 2 is me finding a solution to my problems, and sharing that solution with the other men who need it.

The alternative, Step 2a, is that if no solution can be found, then we are ground zero for the uprising.

But make no mistake young man, (you seem young) it most definitely starts with anger.

It’s a common tactic for Philippine and Indonesian girls. One of my favorite ways of dealing with it is to just enjoy the quiet, and act as if I don’t notice her noxious vapors. Drives em batty that that they can’t poison my mood, and eventually they learn that their tactic doesn’t work.

Another anti pouting mechanism is to just make fun of her by calling her Ms. Pouty, or to rape her roughly. I’m not fond of rewarding pouty behaviour, so I prefer to start the raping after the pout is finishing up.

Yes, I am. Years of disappointment have not yet slumped my broad shoulders.

But I’d say that angry and complaint are not the same and that – in this case – anger is not necessary.

You want an alternative to Roissys cure for the current state of things? How’s this?

Find a traditional girl, a virgin ideally. Treat her kindly but dominantly. Marry her with a pre-nup and (if you must) have your kids secretly paternity tested for peace of mind. Never stop gaming her to build and keep attraction.

And should, god forbid, you do all that and still end up cuckolded and divorced?

Well if you’re a leader of men, you should have no trouble getting back on your feet.

See comments above from Dave from Hawaii about being a ” calm bulwark for her tempest” to rage against, or from me about being a calm Rock of Gibralter against which her storm tossed seas can crash. Then both of us saying “feel better now” afterwards with a smile and a hug. (Well maybe we didn’t go into quite that much detail, but that’s the idea.)

And that’s the essence of the long blog submission I wrote three years ago. I’m surprised that I handle things somewhat differently now. The frame is set such that such outbursts are not tolerated.

For instance, I’ve physically thrown my GF out of my house when she was being tempestous. Or the next day I’d tell her to visit her sister for a few days. I simply don’t allow that behaviour in my house.

Overall, I’m the loving rock of stability – but a rock with rules. My house is a pleasant place, and unpleasant people leave my house.

Find a traditional girl, a virgin ideally. Treat her kindly but dominantly. Marry her with a pre-nup and (if you must) have your kids secretly paternity tested for peace of mind. Never stop gaming her to build and keep attraction.

RooshV has described this inability to feel much for women that’s come upon him as a result of both his volume of women, and how easy it’s been for him to get them, on a one night basis usually. Yeah, that is disturbing.

I’ve heard of this dynamic many times. One man who posted on the expat community website http://www.stickmanbangkok.com considers his life ruined because of his inability to feel much of anything for women anymore. I’ve noticed my ability to bond has dropped.

Some of the drop I like. I get oneitis less, and can handle it better. Being in love can suck, when it’s obsessive.

But I refuse to go home with a multitude of disco chicks, and neither do I pay for sex. I’m saving myself. It really seems that sex is a habit that needs protecting. I save myself from becoming soul less.

This crash is fake. The banks and credit card companies are deliberately, and with almost insane aggressiveness, sucking credit out of the economy. Thomas Jefferson understood the stunts these blameless bankers play, as did Andrew Jackson…”

My name is Kamal, and I …….

support this message.

Anyone who wants serious historical proof of this should look into the Egyptian banking scandals surrounding the Khedive and Lord E. Barring, and also the Ottoman Bank scandals around the construction of the Istanbul railroad. For a civilization that helped mold modern banking and international trade in the middle ages, the Turkish Caliphate were utter and total suckers when it came to the influence of 19th century European Banking houses.

Similar drama as over here with the know nothings and populist movements and the setting up of the first American national bank.

Get “Wall Street and the rise of Hitler” and “Creature from Jeckell Island” the first book is ruthlessly well researched by an academic, the second book is a bit more populist and conspiratorial in tone but still has good historical research.

Hedge Fund investor Jim Rogers also had a lot, a lot, to say in interviews over the last couple of years. dig him up folks. This “crisis” was predictable and could be seen from miles away coming.

Hedge Fund investor Jim Rogers also had a lot, a lot, to say in interviews over the last couple of years. dig him up folks. This “crisis” was predictable and could be seen from miles away coming.

I was talking about specific, new action, not about the long-term problems many are aware of .

For the last few months, credit has been tightened, excessively.

If everything was great, and little bunnies were hopping around while birds sang in the air and oil was 20 dolllars a barrel…… then things would still be getting worse do to the deliberate removal of credit from the system. It is this removal that has so savagely increased problems in the last few months. The long-term problems are worsening, but that IS NOT WHY EVERYONE IS ON EDGE.

I doubt I am the only person to sense this tension among others.

From what I have seen, the following has occurred:

Loans have been denied far more frequently to companies in the past few months, and credit has been denied far more to many people(mortgages, personal loans, and credit cards) in the last few months as well. In general, the money supply(whatever the Fed boys say) has slowed in growth, or even shrunk.

This is deliberate. Money is paid in to pay down existing debts, but less new debts are created. This shrinks, or slows down the expansion, of money in circulation.

In any time in the last decade, that would cause serious economic trouble, REGARDLESS of long term problems.

Others can speculate as to why this is done, but I am almost certain it is being done.

Loans have been denied far more frequently to companies in the past few months

You know, I don’t go around pretending to be an engineer…

I can’t speak to consumer loans, but the past few months have seen a drastic EXPANSION in credit to companies. And I do mean drastic.

Companies are raising record amounts of money, and at extremely attractive (for the companies) coupons as well.

Financial credit is nice and loose. I wouldn’t know about consumer credit though.

Furthermore, credit – in general – tightened between September and March. Credit – in general – has rapidly expanded since then.

You could maybe say that credit has tightened in the past year. That might be accurate (or not) depending on whether credit has expanded slower or faster in the last few months than it tightened before then.

cliff Arroyo the probable default model of human existence is a big extended family

I posted some time ago that the extended family model(the obamas) is best. It works for women and men. Clio posted good reasons why it can be troublesome but I think it’s better than the nuclear family.

dave of hawaii As I said ASDF, she WAS a massive bitch…when I was acting like a massive beta chump. I’ve come to realize, it literally and figuratively was my fault

Nope, not your fault that she cut up. It’s not okay to take advantage of people because they are weaker. Along these lines we can say that it’s not Madoff’s fault he stole from his victims. We should blame the victims for being dumb enough to give him their money.

Your wife had no right disrespecting you because you didn’t want to lay into her.

I can recall a story you posted her about 4 months ago about the time the two of you were coming from a dinner party. You said that you’re wife asked you if you thought some woman, maybe a model, was better looking that she is. She fussed at you when you didn’t give her the answer she wanted to hear.

As a woman, I really don’t get why she would ask you that when she knows herself if the other woman is more attractive. That’s just dumb sh*t that some women do. If your brave enough, your response should be, yes she is better looking but I love you not her, you can list a few of her good qualites too for good measure. If she becomes upset because you said the other woman looks better, don’t even listen to her BS. Shut that ish down by walking away or telling her to get the heck out of your face.

I just wanted to go along to get along, and assumed that she wanted the same thing.There is nothing wrong with being this way, I’m too. In fact most human beings are , I guess that’s what makes most of us beta.

When she’d get upset, I would try to “buy” her complacency by kissing her ass. Well you don’t have to kiss her butt *but* I understand your desire to have peace restored.

Funny thing is, I’m no “wimp” when it comes to dealing with other people.

AH Ha, You see this is what I’ve posted about time and time again here but some of the guys have trouble understanding. A woman needs to feel that her man can protect her, plain and simple , that’s evio/bio and thousands of years of conditioning at work folks. Without that feeling, she will lose respect for him. A man being able to protect his woman or at least try to, doesn’t = a woman wanting an alpha thug. A woman wanting a man to protect her is the major reason most women prefer men who are tall.

PUAs are now part of a global decentralized, leaderless movement against the progressive left.

but I disagree with him here:

We also need some form of political jiujitsu that makes the left openly accept polygamy under their own belief system.

Rather, I think that mass immigration, big government, and affirmative action should rate as primary targets over women’s suffrage.

Broadly, the shape and inner workings of a mass movement must be debated at a later date, given the current amorphousness of Western Man’s plight and how to mitigate it. What’s needed at present is decentralized, individual- or cellular activity that indirectly advances the difficult to define, yet agreed upon goal: the recovery of Western Civilization. Individual men, or cells composed of such, can do the following absent centralized, overarching leadership:

1. Learn game. Use it for pump-and-dumps if that’s your bag. If you’re an older dude – as in, you’re 35 or older – you owe it to your civilization to learn LTR game to keep a good woman in your bed and squeezing out your kids. Don’t agree to an LTR with a woman you’re unwilling to marry, and don’t marry a woman who doesn’t want kids.

2. If you’re mature and secure enough to be a father, find a good woman, marry her, honor her, game her, and sire 2+ kids upon her.

Damn, I suck with H T M L. The long block-quoted passage starting at “Rather” is mine, while “We also need some form of political jiujitsu that makes the left openly accept polygamy under their own belief system” is Make Fuck’s. Great handle, by the way, Make Fuck.

A.J travis Since women caused this mess, and it is not in their interest to change it back (why would any woman vote for capped child support or the repeal of no-fault divorce?) I do not think, however well-intentioned she may seem, Chick or any other woman will help us in this… Until they see that we are winning

A.J. travis did it ever enter you mind that I might have a father and few brothers whom I love dearly? Or what about the fact that I really want things to be fair &equal or at least just between the sexes?

Let’s talk about child support for a moment. As whiskey and a number of others have posted continuously, the illegitimacy is 70% in the blk community. This leaves the door open for many blk men to be raked over the coals for child support. Believe it of not, there are some sensible women who understand how the amount of child support that some men are forced to pay, can in the long run put the father in a situation where he can’t afford to pay. If a father’s child support payments take such a substantial portion of his income that he can’t afford a roof over his head or food for his stomach, how long will he be able to afford to pay? If he becomes ill for a while and can’t work, what then? He’ll go into debt, fall behind on his child support payments and a whole lot of drama will ensue.

So what do those women do, well some work out a deal with the father, without the courts intervention, that he should pay a reasonable amount per mouth or just buy the things that the child needs*(milk, food, clothes, diapers, school utensils etc..). Other women, when they go before the judge may ask that the judge lower the amount he ordered the dad to pay because it would place too much of a burden on the father.

For men like yourself, the burden is on you to choose the women you choose to have children with care. Crying after the fact that some woman trapped you is beta when you have the tools to arm yourself. It also allows men to get off scott free without putting in any effort.
Wrap it up. Find out what type of BC she is using and looking into another option if she is unreliable with the pill. If she doesn’t want to discuss birth control with you, JUST LEAVE HER. Protect your own ass(or wallet) first. Why any man would leave such things up to a woman, I have no idea when a missed pill can affect your life in such a major way. I bet the average man here knows little to nothing about the current forms of birth control or how things like vomiting & antibiotics can bring on the stork.

*this can put you in a ruff spot if the two of you fall out and she decides to take you to court. Some states don’t even bother taking in to consideration what a father may have done/paid for in the past. You will be forced to pay CS from the time of the kid’s birth with interest. Bottom line; know the woman who you’re sleeping with raw dog.

2 nd part of your argument
A.J Travis wrote Chick or any other woman will help us in this… Until they see that we are winning

Pure BS.
A.J Travis, if you read my posts you can see that I doubt the supposed “good nature” of most human beings. However, there are some who are moved to do what is fair and right because they honestly believe that even if doing something evil enriches you, you should speak out against it.
I read where you wrote to MU that you know a bit about African-American culture. Well, a major reason AA’s were able to bring down Jim Crowe was because of white allies. Now think about that for a moment.

A.J again It never ceases to amaze me that the women who comment h ere do not judge me based on the substance of my argument, but only if I say something that pleases them.
Not really, living a society where most men have the morals like whiskey or yourself(children &not sleeping with another man’s woman) would be good for people of both genders but men would benefit moreso. I’m sure you can figure out why.

absintheDebbi Harry, singer for Blondie, mentioned in an interview that she once had an opportunity to cheat on her boyfriend with Mick Jagger but didn’t because she respected her boyfriend too much. He was the brains of the band, got her off of drugs and from appearances the stronger one emotionally. They eventually broke up but when he had a serious illness she put her career on hold and devoted herself to nursing him back to health. Not to bad for a NY hipster celebrity. Not too bad looking in her prime either.

This makes debbi harry a decent person in my book. She didn’t fall into temptation. The person who sticks by you in your darkest hour,in her case her boyfriend, is worth their weight in gold & true friend. Many people don’t find out who there true friends are until they are sick and/or broke.

Excellent article, I’ve noticed many of these trends myself. The overall young American culture is heading towards the end you describe, although maybe all is not hopeless in the dating scene.

I still have some friends who fail to see the reality that is described in these online discussions as they still follow outdated notions that women are angels of purity. When in reality as you have written, women (and men for that matter) have always acted in ways in accordance with the darker side of human nature.

The modern free society and the your ‘four sirens’ have simply taken away any consequences to a woman’s behavior. Without consequences and rules, they revert back to their instinctual behavior. Hence the attraction to alpha males and the entire reason we are all learning the game.

It’s not okay to take advantage of people because they are weaker. Along these lines we can say that it’s not Madoff’s fault he stole from his victims. We should blame the victims for being dumb enough to give him their money.

Chic, I’ve realized that much of the conflict I was involved in with her was based on a continual irritation level she was in because of my beta behavior. One of the most important things I figured out, post-game awareness, was that once I stopped acting beta, her irritation was gone, and her attraction has been restored. She hasn’t changed one bit…she has no clue about how or why things have changed.

If I sat down and told her in plain language that I studied up on “game” and have been using the subtle, psychological insights from it to change the way I act, she would probably just think I was being crazy or something.

Your wife had no right disrespecting you because you didn’t want to lay into her.

Bah. She didn’t respect me, because I didn’t respect myself. Deep down, I knew I was just “selling out” in trying to cater to her to try and make her ‘happy.’

I can recall a story you posted her about 4 months ago about the time the two of you were coming from a dinner party. You said that you’re wife asked you if you thought some woman, maybe a model, was better looking that she is. She fussed at you when you didn’t give her the answer she wanted to hear.

As a woman, I really don’t get why she would ask you that when she knows herself if the other woman is more attractive. That’s just dumb sh*t that some women do.

You’re not recalling the story in it’s entirety, or in fact the most relevant parts: 1) on that occasion, this lady, who we both know was damn well better looking than her, sat across the table from me, and that 2) her and I hit it off immediately. It was apparent that she was attracted to me, as we ended up talking almost the entire evening.

My point for that story was simply to illustrate how MY RESPONSES to her challenges about me openly flirting and connecting with another beautiful women right in front of her differed on a previous occasion.

In other words, her challenging of me bantering with a beautiful women right in front of her was basically a shit test. Before I understood game, I failed that test miserably. In a very similar situation prior, when the same thing happened with another beautiful woman at a party, basically denied that I found the other woman attractive, told her she was imagining things when she accused me of being flirtatious….and that I only loved her! That she was the most beautiful woman, and that I never look at other women…blah….blah…blah…desperate, pleading beta bilge. Pathetic desperate pleading with her to not get angry.

But the whole point of that dinner party story was how after I understood the basis for attraction…when we got into the car after the dinner, instead of failing her shit test by trying to beg and plead my way out of making her angry, I got cocky, arrogant and humorous.

“Yeah, she was talking to me all night…of course! Didn’t you notice that ALL the hot ladies at the table wanted to talk to me? That’s what you gotta deal with if you wanna be married to THIS!”

I said that sort of cheesy sounding line, going way over the top, with a self-satisfied smirk as I looked right at her.

A FAAAR cry from my former, beta chump, acting as if I just got caught with my hand in the cookie jar, and pleading to her for mercy.

And goddamnit if it didn’t work like magic! Instead of sleeping on the couch that night, we didn’t get much sleep at all.

I remember that night especially well, because that was a watershed moment of my understanding of game. All the things I had read up to that point were really just theoretical…I hadn’t actually really even dared to ty any of it on her until that night.

I literally experienced how “cocky but funny” worked to disarm a shit test…how flirting with another women in front of my wife actually increased her attraction towards me…how I learned to control the frame of the conversation, which entirely steered our conversation into a manner that made me more attractive to her rather than angry.

If your brave enough, your response should be, yes she is better looking but I love you not her, you can list a few of her good qualites too for good measure.

LMAO – hereby chic literally confirms the old “never take a woman’s advice on how to deal with women.”

This is EXACTLY how I was failing her shit tests prior, and would end up in a protracted, dispute.

If she becomes upset because you said the other woman looks better, don’t even listen to her BS. Shut that ish down by walking away or telling her to get the heck out of your face.

See, but that’s exactly how I now handle such things…except I use cocky/funny and backhanded compliments rather than letting her lead the conversation in the dynamic of her as interrogator and me as the guilty party.

I can’t speak to consumer loans, but the past few months have seen a drastic EXPANSION in credit to companies. And I do mean drastic.

Companies are raising record amounts of money, and at extremely attractive (for the companies) coupons as well.

Financial credit is nice and loose. I wouldn’t know about consumer credit though.

Furthermore, credit – in general – tightened between September and March. Credit – in general – has rapidly expanded since then.

You could maybe say that credit has tightened in the past year. That might be accurate (or not) depending on whether credit has expanded slower or faster in the last few months than it tightened before then.

Just a little friendly advice from your neighborhood trader.

It’s very good of you, Seeking, to defend the honor of the financial companies you work for. Since you are an unbiased individual, who works for the people I am accusing of despicable behavior, I will trust your disinterested opinion better than my own lying eyes.

If my words seem angry to you, Seeking, then I hope you believe I’m laughing on the inside. Because I am.

You people are SOOOOO over the top. I mean really.

Seeking even expects me to believe the numbers the Federal Government and Federal Reserve put out.

But that would all just be negative theorizing about the future, wouldn’t it? She wouldn’t be focused on the HERE AND NOW. And after all, he was so *hot* and the sex was just so, well, *hot*.

In the here and now she could have realized that what she attracted was not what she really wanted in her heart of hearts, but that requires being awake to reality, not focusing on the negative. The outcome is what she invited, whether she knows it or not. Mostly we don’t know it until it’s gotten us in a lot of trouble. Nothing comes to anyone without an expectation and invitation. Even a child, by association with fucked up parents invite/attract abuse. This is law, not blame. The same laws that move the planets around the sun, govern human life experience.

It does not mean we should not be loving and compassionate, though I’d be surprised if everyone here didn’t accuse me of being a cold hearted bitch for suggesting that a child could have expectations of abuse simply by association. Vibes are picked up before they can even talk; in the womb in fact.

“Lady” Raine’s body language study is no doubt meant to make her look before she leaps next time. Experience teaches us, and hopefully not to be negative, but aware. Big difference between looking for the bad and simply being cautious.

And after all, he was so *hot* and the sex was just so, well, *hot*.

Been there. Now I use both halves my brain.

collegeboy

The first song sounds too “george micheal-ist.” No like.
Second song=Dopeness

I do approve 50/50. You can now die happy.

I’ll start you off with this scene.

and finish you off with this live performance.

Are you bipolar by any chance? I must say, Luther Vandross? Not sexy in my opinion. You’re 50% yourself right now. This song gives me the biggest goose bumps.

In the world I see – you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You’ll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You’ll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Tower. And when you look down, you’ll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying strips of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway

I work for a hedge fund, not an investment bank. We have taken no public money, we didn’t cause the crisis, and we’ve made the crisis less severe by providing liquidity to markets.

I didn’t cite any government numbers. The dramatic expansion of credit to companies I know because I trade it every day. Every time a new company is in the market raising debt we are – usually – there to buy it. At the very least, we always see the deals.

You bitter old man, you have not the slightest clue what you’re talking about.

So you admit that in her state-of-nature purity a woman desires abusive thugs because they make her wet and that it’s only AFTER she realized she can’t “tame” him that she then learns to look elsewhere?

That was a little angry… probably unnecessarily so. I just had some Mexican (traitor!) food.

Anyway, the point is, I know what I’m saying from day to day experience. I live it every day. And I have no bias. Six months ago, I would have told you credit is tight and things are getting worse. Today, I’m telling you credit is loosening and things – for now – are getting better.

To use an engineering example, it would be like me telling the lead engineer of the WTC that I know better than him that 9/11 was an inside job because I saw a video online that told me so… He would probably know better than me.

“I think some have real ideological agendas) college educated feminist Child and human services social workers who unwittingly abet a good deal of real social horror”

I am involved indirectly with children who are in the social services system. I know social workers and yes most are well meaning but yes they abet a good deal of real social horror. The average career span of a social worker is two years. Two years! They become aware very quickly of the inadequacies and inequities in the system which pays their salaries. They are also very aware of how they are NOT helping kids. The real issues lay with the government and where they focus their dollars. In my country they’ve decided to make ‘permanency’ the plan for every child in care. Permanency is family, kinship care, foster care or private adoption. Great in theory folks, however there are some kids who would be better off NOT in their families homes -way better off! And a great many kids by the time they reach us would never be adopted. But the government does not want kids in residential care, they say it’s institutional (and it is!) but the real reason is because it costs a lot of moula. The real monies need to be spent at the front end of a child’s life not after he’s been ruined by who he’s been raised by. The government cheaps out with early services because kids are still manageable enough for parents to keep and give to their abusive, murderous boyfriends. We get them when they’re so messed from all they’ve had to deal with. Mostly neglect cases which I hate to say is almost worse than abuse because at least with abuse someone ‘cared’ enough to react to you.

I realize that was somewhat off topic, but wanted you to know that we who are part of the system are very aware of catastrophic flaws. I am not a psychologist, social worker or counsellor, I am on the business side but involved enough to know it’s bad and is only going to get worse.

These two girls I work with, the hot ones with boyfriends, REALLY have boyfriends. It’s not bullshit. One lists it on her myspace page, the other talks about how she’s been with him for 6 years. Now who knows if either cheat – they are law students and Roissy will agree female law types tend to be slutty. However these two are nice for law student types and seem like they could be faithful. But of course there’s no harm in flirting. And no harm in gaming. Maybe I get myself invited to parties and meet their friends. BTW these two have “smart guy” type boyfriends. Whiskey, the truth is that *most* educated women do not date *thugs*. Come on, you know this.

I know a lot of girls now. But they just seem to stop as friends for now. It’s the toughest thing for me to take it to that next level.

Haha, what kind of spiraling paranoid hell do you live in? Stick this shit into a science fiction novel. The unwashed masses will eat it right up and hail you as some kind of genius because they don’t know any better.

Cochran doesn’t get it about the Chinese. Not only did they have a huge “dysgenic” spurt from 1949-1976; even today the ignorant peasants outbreed the city people.

Shanghai had below-replacement fertility levels by the late 1950s, and the hill tribes throughout the country still had many more children last I checked (about three years ago).

The idea that China has a functional eugenics program is pretty silly. In fact, I lived in a neighborhood in NE Beijing during the late 1990s where there were a number of illegal foreign residents, including a lot of Africans and Korean hookers. By the next summer after I moved there, there was a new crop of mixed race babies crawling around in the courtyard amidst towering hemp stands and rampant chickens. There was absolutely no control over this supposedly illegitimate mingling of DNA, and this was in BEIJING! Can you imagine how it is in Shenzhen or Jilin?

You have to remember that the people who are actually under state control in China are generally the more responsible ones. It really isn’t too different from here. In many ways, it’s worse (although we’re pushing it).

Although I think Chic Noir’s points about Social Security and Medicaid being the country’s two biggest entitlement programs in its history is accurate and true, I’d be interested in seeing whether all the “other” things Roissy mentioned wrt Black and Brown folks-which is meant by the acronym “NAMs-adds up. I don’t know for sure, but I suspect that SS and Medicaid would probably still come out ahead in terms of sheer expenditure in tax dollars.

Which, at least insofar as Roissy and those who share his views are concerned, brings up a very interesting question: if indeed the issue is the paying out monies for the non-productive members of our society-and surely, Roissy and quite a few others seem to hold the view that in the main, Black and Brown folk are simply sucking the system dry-then why not call for the mandatory use of euthenizing old folks say, around 70 or so? I recall a Star Trek Next Generation episode that dealt with this very theme, where once you reached a certain age in that society, you were offed, for the good of the rest of society. I’ve read previous posts by Roissy where he discusses his very elderly grandmother and her waning years in an old folks’ home-places where people send their elderly to die, basically-and they tend to languish there for years and years in some cases, all the while the medical bills are piling up due to the vain efforts of keeping them alive. They are no longer productive members of society, and surely, based on other writings by Roissy wrt “culling the herd”, he should have no problem w/offing old folks past a certain age-yes?

At a federal level Social Security and Medicare are the biggest individual items. At a state and local level the big programs are education and Medicare (the state funds half, the feds the other half). Education represents about 75 percent of the local property tax burden and about 40 percent of the state tax burden.

One way to deal with the SS/Medicare cost would be to use an estate tax to recoup an individual’s cost to the system. In other words, when you die you get a bill from Medicare. The estate pays what it can (exempting a small amount for funeral expenses) and the rest is written off (i.e., funded from tax revenues). This way the next of kin effectively contribute to their parent’s end-of-life expenses. It would still be progressive (the wealthy pay more) as poorer estates might raise no money while wealthy estates might cover all expenses.
[the above is a barely thought out idea – sort of back-of-the-envelope type of thing]

there is a natural balance between testosterone and high IQ. If you use eugenics massively, you produce a generation of effeminate but physically perfect individuals, extremely prone to diseases and aging.

it is what happens to horses and bulls and there is no reason to think it will be different with men.

the eventual super-race individuals like Bandido or Yao-Ming are the exception, both with eugenics and without

Furthermore, credit – in general – tightened between September and March. Credit – in general – has rapidly expanded since then.

And how would Seeking know that? What national numbers provided by who, would you have gotten that from?

This is the internet Seeking, where simply forgetting anything you said that is inconvenient doesn’t work.

Financial_Comment_By_Engineer

I work for a hedge fund, not an investment bank. We have taken no public money, we didn’t cause the crisis, and we’ve made the crisis less severe by providing liquidity to markets.

I didn’t cite any government numbers. The dramatic expansion of credit to companies I know because I trade it every day. Every time a new company is in the market raising debt we are – usually – there to buy it. At the very least, we always see the deals.

You bitter old man, you have not the slightest clue what you’re talking about.

Your claim of the company your working for having access to enormous amounts of capital… enough to fund huge amounts of credit, but being simply another innocent Wall Street Babe, who knows nothing about nothing, is amusing, but also retarded.

That would be the case, even if I actually believed everything Seeking said, which would be retarded as well.

PA, Default,
I hear ya both on this, man; but again, why the sudden hemminh and hawing? When its “NAMs” (read: Black and Brown folks) there doesn’t seem to be much in the way of handwringing-simply stop legal and illegal immigration, welfare etc, full stop.

Yet, when I broach the idea of simply cutting off SS and Medicaid full stop, the handwringing starts.

IF the argument is about who is a productive member to society, one could surely make the case, that a 70-plus year old person, on average, ain’t that productive. And, for that matter, one could argue that an illegal Brown person, in their youth/productive years, is just that, productive, though they may be working under the table and potentially taking jobs away from more homegrown folks.

Again, Roissy has discussed a family member of his, simply waiting for the bell to toll, so to speak. In the meantime, she’s taking up valuable resources. Why not simply off her and be done with it?

Oh, and before anyone gets it twisted-w/the exception of my Dad, who died in a hospital, my Mom, and both my Grandparents died at home. We all took turns caring for them until the end. No welfare, though in fairness both my Grandad and Dad had nice pensions from their jobs and the military. My Grandmother was a self made businesswoman. And when it came time to put my Mom in the ground, the family looked to me to get the money together and I did so. The State didn’t have to shell out one thin dime.

So, if we’re so quick to cutoff “NAMs” (read: Black and Brown folks)-and let’s be clear here, I don’t necessarily *disagree* here-why not simply cutoff the spigot of SS and Medicaid?

SS and Medicaid are relatively successful in avoiding moral hazard (economic term, look it up) because you have to pay significantly into them to get something back. Moral hazard is endemic to insurance schemes of any kind, but it’s particularly bad when people don’t pay into the system.

And, for that matter, one could argue that an illegal Brown person, in their youth/productive years, is just that, productive, though they may be working under the table and potentially taking jobs away from more homegrown folks.

Illegals tend to take more money from the system than they put in. Policing, medical care, and education impose significant costs on the more productive members of society.

And I am not a fan of heroic measures to save a very old person’ life. Octogenerians’ heart bypass surgeries are the reason I pay more than my share in health insurance.

Yes, going all out to save a 48 year old man who is working to put his kids through college and who will have another 30 years of life left makes sense, but going all out so some 75 year old can live to 78 is ridiculous. Past a certain age, people should just get bare bones care, including palliative care. If they want gold plated medicine, they should have to pay for it themselves.

Whoa, don’t even say it. The meme that people are useless after a certain age pisses me off and much too prevalent. Fair enough to have a personal choice about where your taxes go. Don’t give the money, but don’t be killing on principle alone either.

The increasing burden of older people on the state as I see it here is because of the breakdown of normal family relationships and expectations. Simply put, the children — if they exist — are not willing and noone is forcing them to.

If I mention ‘nursing home’ to the family, see if I don’t get attacked by a sharp object…

I’ll give it one more try and then I’ll write it off as you being deliberately dense.

And how would Seeking know that? What national numbers provided by who, would you have gotten that from?

This is the internet Seeking, where simply forgetting anything you said that is inconvenient doesn’t work.

I would know it because I see it every day. I know you saw that part of my post, right? You may have missed it or not understood, so I’ll explain.

Every time a company wants to raise debt, I get a call. Based on how high they have to make the yield on the bond to get the deal done, you can see how tight credit is.

As an example, Verizon raised $2bn in 10 year debt in late October at an 8.75% coupon. In March, they were able to raise another ~$2bn in debt at 6.35%.

Another example would be BP. They raised $3bn in 5 year debt at 5.25% at the beginning of November (the worst of the crunch in terms of corporate debt). The did another 5 year deal May 1st at 3.625%. For a company rated AA+, that’s a huge swing.

So anyway, that’s how I would know. Not government statistics but my job that I work every day.

Your claim of the company your working for having access to enormous amounts of capital… enough to fund huge amounts of credit, but being simply another innocent Wall Street Babe, who knows nothing about nothing, is amusing, but also retarded.

I’m not really sure I understand what this means. What do you mean by the bolded part? I don’t work on Wall Street, and I’m hardly innocent or a know-nothing.

I’m not saying ‘I have no idea what you’re talking about’ with glassy eyes. I’m saying ‘what you said might once have been true but hasn’t been the case for many months’.

I have no agenda in saying that. The government isn’t breathing down my neck. We took no money. I don’t have to ‘convince’ anyone that credit is available. I’m just stating the facts as I see them on the front lines.

Anyway, hope that clears things up. You can respond back with another confused, snarky post if you’d like, but really, what’s the point?

Obsidian, I wasn’t doing any handwringing. I was clear in my reply. I don’t care if people are productive or unproductive — this isn’t a Chinese factory. People can hitchhike across the country or lie under a tree all they like. Couldn’t care less.

The extended family model, here in America, does work *if* certain preconditions are met:

The major players-the baby mama & baby daddy-are either married or at the very least, in a strongand commited LTR.

Barring that, what you actually get by “extended family” is Nana & Pop-Pop being virtual stand-ins for baby mama/daddy. This is quite prevelant in the Black community, and I see it quite a bit in the Hispanic community as well.

Also: if we consider the Palins, we see another example of the extended family properly done.

Furthermore, credit – in general – tightened between September and March. Credit – in general – has rapidly expanded since then.

Seeking is obviously using the money supply issued by the Federal Reserve here. I have no idea why he thinks he can credibly deny that. Exact months of turn around, combined with ‘in general’ means either that he is involved in the consumer credit markets/corporate credit markets/municipal credit markets on a daily basis to a massive extent, or he is using government compiled numbers.

I have been hit in the face through personal and family experiences with the sheer, and irrational, aggressiveness with which financial companies are sucking credit out of the system. Sure, maybe my few impressions ‘don’t make up the whole story’. But I actually doubt it.

Seeking said:

As an example, Verizon raised $2bn in 10 year debt in late October at an 8.75% coupon. In March, they were able to raise another ~$2bn in debt at 6.35%.

Another example would be BP. They raised $3bn in 5 year debt at 5.25% at the beginning of November (the worst of the crunch in terms of corporate debt). The did another 5 year deal May 1st at 3.625%. For a company rated AA+, that’s a huge swing.

I wonder what connection the largess delivered to international mega-corporations has to do with everyone else?

All the ‘merely’ 500 million dollar companies, all the ‘tiny’ hundreds of millions of people, you know, the unconnected.

Hey, I wouldn’t be surprised if the government just gave the connected hundreds of billions of dollars because ‘they are connected’.

I know, I know, Seeking, it seems unlikely, but I think it MIGHT happen.🙂

What part of ‘the financial industry has no credibility’ do you fail to understand, Seeking?

The real deal here, tying in the whole “NAM” (read: Black & Brown folks) thing together w/SS & Medicaid, is the simple fact that a whole lot of White folks simply don’t wanna be bothered w/their own mommas and daddies, etc et al, when they get old. They shuffle em off to old folks’ homes to DIE. And they really don’t have that big a problem w/Black and Brown folk tending to them and literally doing the shit jobs that SWPL and da facto SWPL Whites would rather pass on.

Then these very same folk have the nerve to say stuff like, we gotta get rid of immigration! We cutoff welfare! And so on.

Like I said Bhetti, my family, we cared for our own till the End. I know what it’s like to dig a grave. How many others here can honestly say that? I suspect, not many.

Being who you are, you understand well the Islamic view of life and death, so it ain’t no big whup for us; but for so many, let’s just say it, Whites in the Western world, Death, dying and being/getting old are HUGE taboos. And they’ve proven that they will do virtually anything to stave it off, or, failing that, push it off on others to deal w/the dirty work.

Hence, recourse to “NAMs” (read: Black & Brown folks).

The reason why our family tended to our own, instead of shuffling them off to the old folks’ home, came from our Mom, who worked for a brief time at such places; the way those folks were treated BY THEIR OWN FLESH & BLOOD was nothing short of appalling. And, to a family, and I’m using that term very loosely here, they were all very White.

IF the argument is that society should take stong steps and measures to ensure its not carrying too much dead weight in terms of nonproductive folk, I’m all for cutting off the spigot. Older folk, by and large, simply aren’t that productive. Period. So, being that the two biggest and longest running, entitlement programs in American history are Social Security and Medicaid, why not start there? Why not simply say, look you can collect till you’re about 70 or so, after that you’re on your own? We’re willing to give both legal AND illegal immigrants the boot, and we’re willing to give fellow American citizens, the vast majority of whom have been in this country longer than the lineage of most participating here, the cold shoulder, too. Since so many White folk kick their own mommas and daddies to the curb anyway (old folks’ homes), why dither around? Why not simply make the bold move, and cut em off? I’m pretty sure we can fix the national budget pretty quickly in so doing.

Obsidian: You’re very conscious about race differences and I suspect this is more true for your generation or your personal experience, but I think it’s out-dated.

If you’re being more accurate, it should stem from different attitudes based on culture, religion and politics. Regardless of who is effected by Hating Old People, the infection is spreading and is pretty much there within all the young generations born and raised where I am, regardless of skin colour.

I suspect it will be a problem within black communities, if it isn’t already. It’s a country-wide problem, enabled by loss of the old values.

When the government buys something for less than it is worth, that is giving the people it bought the assets from money. I know, it’s so subtle that Seeking’s innocent mind is unable to comprehend the cunning ‘intellect’ of buying trash loans for pennies on the dollar then having the government buy them from you for 50 cents on the dollar. If you are ‘connected’, that is.

Seeking even defends the bailout stunt. Which pretty much proves my point. So Seeking is right, I DON’T have anything more to say.

You claimed that companies raising debts in the private markets was a government bailout. When I pointed out that that wasn’t true, you decided to switch from the examples I provided to TARP. THESE ARE DIFFERENT THINGS.

And the government never actually did “[buy] trash loans for pennies on the dollar then having the government buy them from you for 50 cents on the dollar”. THAT NEVER HAPPENED. That was the original purpose of TARP, but then they decided to invest the money directly into these companies.

These are two entirely different things. Engineers are supposed to be intelligent and logical. You’re displaying neither right now. It’s because you don’t know the subject well – and that’s fine – but don’t get so damn smug about something you’re so ignorant about.

As for me defending the bailout, I was, am, and always will be against bailouts. When have I ever said I was for a bailout?

PA,
Fair enough, I like you, too. And Bhetti, actually, studies have shown that Black families tend to lookout for and tend to each other more on average, than White ones. This extends to adoption as well. To be sure, there are Black folks in old folk’s homes, some of which are mistreated. But I can promise you, that if you take a door to door tour of the hood, you’ll find far and away more older folk living w/the family, than you will among the suburban White. Try me.

Here’s my point people-I want to see if we can be consistent w/the logic of the argument, or, if this is really a racial thing. IF the argument is about dealing w/unproductive people, and IF the argument is about saving wasted resources, then logic would demand that we look, seriously, at the fact that we have an ever increasingly older cohort of Americans, and this is directly due to two of the country’s longest running entitlement programs: Social Security and Medicaid. And, since we already basically shit on the elderly, why dither around w/it? Why not simply cut em off-afterall, we cutoff obstensibly Black and Brown folk w/the Welfare Reform Act of the 90s, and contrary to popular opinion, I can tell you for a fact that people coming to ths country, legally, are being sent back home all the time.

Listen folks, this is very simple. SS & Medicaid are and have been, thee most expensive entitlement programs we’ve ever had-and only promises to get more expensive in the future. If we’re serious about cutting expenses, especially wrt folk who are no longer giving to society, I strongly urge we start the incision there.

When the government buys something for less than it is worth, that is giving the people it bought the assets from money

I meant:

When the government buys something for MORE than it is worth, that is giving the people it bought the assets from money.

Seeking rambled insanely:

You claimed that companies raising debts in the private markets was a government bailout. When I pointed out that that wasn’t true, you decided to switch from the examples I provided to TARP. THESE ARE DIFFERENT THINGS.

And the government never actually did “[buy] trash loans for pennies on the dollar then having the government buy them from you for 50 cents on the dollar”. THAT NEVER HAPPENED. That was the original purpose of TARP, but then they decided to invest the money directly into these companies.

I appreciate you telling me what I said. I really, really do. I don’t care, but I do.

I wrote, exactly, and really immune to misinterpretation:

Hey, I wouldn’t be surprised if the government just gave the connected hundreds of billions of dollars because ‘they are connected’.

So the scam is fluid and ever changing? Once they got the money with one promise, they switched the money to another purpose?

What to call that, what to call that….. oh yeah, Bait-And-Switch.

Needless to say, the fact that our financial industry is practicing bait-and-switch on the American people fills me with ever greater confidence in them!

That is so over-the-top that it is actually funny! Congress passed a law to use money for one thing, but then they changed it!

I have defended you before but you are now obviously gunning for a fight with your “just trying to be logical and consistent” line. Do you really want another long running argument of ever decreasing circles? You know it will go on and on with no resolution.

Massive uncontrolled Hispanic immigration has fucked blue-collar wages. It has allowed employers send black males to the back of the hiring line again.

The H-1B fraud has been used to lower the wages of many middle class males. The kind of solid go-to sort of men we celebrate here. Engineers and computer programmers can be found, they just cannot be found at a price that makes those corporate fucks happy.

Having to deal with non-English speaking children who may arrive behind their grade level has put a tremendous strain on school systems. This causes property taxes to rise, further hurting families. It lowers the quality of education for natives who stay. In order to escape the disintegration of the school system families (white and black) flee to the suburbs. This forces up house prices there further straining family finances.

What would allow a family to provide for their retirement and sickness is savings. Those savings are harder to build because: money has been diverted into housing (the chase for so-called good schools), their wages have been lowered by immigration (assuming jobs are available), and money that would have been savings is now diverted to taxes.

This does not count the loss of trust and civic involvement that diversity has wrought. By bringing in people who have lower skills than average we are weakening our human capital. Even the so-called skilled immigrants are only on a level of the existing population. That is they do not add to human capital, they just dilute it. Culture is the infrastructure on which we deploy human capital. Diversity degrades that cultural infrastructure.

We are being fucked over, so who cares about “logical consistency?”

You can holla back (and I will read any replies), but this is my last word on this subject for now.
D

Hey D,
I continue to be amazed by just how shrill folk can get when someone like myself challenges some of the comments made here. Of course, the difference is, its OK to say outrageous or otherwise highly questionable stuff, if you have a Pale Face. Challenge it while have a Black one, and out comes the cries of outrage, which I’ve always taken as being way too overrated for its own good.

The schools have been crapy long before Reagan’s tilt towards Amnesty came along. The civil unrest of the 60s and 70s (basically, Black folk having had enough of being treated as second class, at best, citizens) w/what became known as White Flight. When White folk fled, they took their tax revenues with them, leaving Black folk, by and large working class at best, to fend for themselves. Oh, and let’s not forget the mass closing of manufacturing plants and the like, too. Take a wild guess as to what the movers and shakers on that score looked like. Hint: not like me.

The deal is that White kids largely go to White schools out in the boonies, and have for decades. What you’re talking about is a neverending status war btw and among Whites. Hispanics, and for that matter Blacks, have at best a tangential role to play.

Then of course, there’s the dirty little fact that a lot of Whites really do want Hispanics around, because they provide much cheaper labor w/o having to deal with dem Darkies. And this view is a lot more pervasive than we’d like to admit.

Black Men have been getting the shaft on unemployment long before Mexicans came on the scene, D. Only now, there’s a halfassed out given for why Black Men have borne the brunt of high two digit unemployment figures, for decades. In other words, the Hispanic thing serves as a very nice cover for a lot of shit.

Bottomline, there can be no real, honest discussion about “cutting welfare” costs *without* taking a cold, brutally honest look at Social Security and Medicaid, period. If we’re really serious about trimming the fat, about heaving the dead weight overboard, we need to start w/the big fish in the pond, instead of the guppies.

Not it’s not what it amounts to. AT ALL. Color per se has nothing to do with it. That’s just your smooth attempt to throw the current experience based NAM term back into leftist shaming terms. The NAM term arose from experience accumulated over the recent past to now.

Minorities don’t underperform in America necessarily, even those far removed racially from founder stock white Americans. Jews certainly don’t, who as semites are yes white, but as different from founder Americans as closely related Arabs are. Jews do better here than any large other group. E. Asians are coming on strong. But ok they look kind of white, color wise. The yellow thing is at most just barely, and almost an invention. But S.Asian Indians are clearly brown. Some of them are rather black in fact. The ones that come to the US on average do great.

So no Obsidian, NAM doesn’t mean black and brown people. It means what it literally stands for, which is entirely based on empirical experience. What NAM amounts to in effect in America is Blacks and Hispanics/Latinos. (As for the later it really means heavily Indio Latinos. White Cubans do very well here as everyone knows. Central American heavily Indio but also usually peasants and similar not so well.) Note the NAM term doesn’t lay claim whether culture or genes are more important or what the mix of importance is. It just reflects common experience about who, broad brush are the under performing minorities in America, as opposed to par or better performing ones, than the average.

In other words that little verbal play of yours is illustrative of the emotional play based on prejudice supportive of your side, rather than fairness, that you do ALL THE TIME.

The term “NAM” is just a rhetorical reach-around for Black and Brown folks. It don’t mean all these other esoteric/eclectic ethnic/racial groups you tried to shoehorn into the acronym. The proof?

If you kindly scroll up in this thread to yeasterday around the 6pm hour, there you will find a post by Chic Noir, where Roissy, acting in his role as “Editor”, clearly uses the term “NAM” in a way that could only be taken to mean Black and Brown folks. I defy you to show me, w/his quote, where White Cubans and Ashkenaizi Jewish-derived folks could fit in.

Moreover, you responded to a post by Dave Alex’s; he asks, are “NAMs” inherently more inferior to Whites, and your reply was that per Dave’s own criteria, *he* would certainly think so. Again, let’s ask Dave Alex and see if he had White Cubans and Jews in mind when he wrote those words.

See, the problem *some* White folk have is that there *is* such a thing as a Brotha that reads, lol. And since we tend to be a lot more confrontational, it helps to talk straight when addressing us, because if you don’t, and try to play all kinds of cutesy word games, we’ll call you loud and long, on your bullshit.

And that’s exactly what this “NAM” business is-a bullshit, half-hearted, weak-kneed way of simply saying Black and Brown folks.

If you like, I can provide more examples from accross the Internet that supports what I’ve just written above.

And I notice you actually have not addressed my key points in relation to Roissy’s appeal-to-assertion “NAM” remarks. Here, let me help you both-I assert, that the biggest “welfare” expenses this country has, and this has been the case for decades, is Social Security and Medicaid. That being the case, if there is to be any honest discussion about spending tax dollars on the nonproductive, one must consider whether spending more and more tax dollars on keeping elderly folks alive is worth it or not.

No honest discussion on this? Get the fuck outta my face on the whole “NAM” bullshit.

O – I don’t really have a dog in this fight and I haven’t been paying much attention.

But I think you flipped what he meant.

I think – Doug correct me if I’m wrong – that NAM doesn’t mean black and brown folk because there are plenty of brown folk – like Indians, Arabs, Sephardi Jews, etc. – that are brown but that the term doesn’t apply to.

His point is that NAM prefers to just Hispanics and (slave-origin) blacks, not all ‘blacks and browns’

Yes Obsidian I’m plenty smart. And plenty fair minded, even when I disagree with you.

I plainly stated that NAM does in essence largely mean African Americans and strongly indio Hispanics.

It’s NOT based on color. S.Asian Indians are dark, many of them very dark. They are NOT included, despite earlier prejudices against them as being probably dumb third worlders. (Actually the IQ of their homeland does test pretty low, but the ones we get in America test very high, which is what’s relevant and what people now react to, to the point of think all Indians must be pretty smart.)

It’s based on results Obsidian. Not historical prejudice. Results.

Oh sure, are white racists going to seize on the term, sure. But that’s not where it comes from, or where the great majority of people who use it are coming from. I’m defining racism not as noticing empirical racial differences and talking about them, but making them up based on preconceived ideas rather than evidence.

As for the long debate that broke out: it’s long. I haven’t read any but a little bit of several long posts that make it up. This is an otherwise dead thread. Maybe I’ll take the time and maybe I won’t.

I think – Doug correct me if I’m wrong – that NAM doesn’t mean black and brown folk because there are plenty of brown folk – like Indians, Arabs, Sephardi Jews, etc. – that are brown but that the term doesn’t apply to.

Exactly right.

The whole point of the term is that it ISN’T based on color or old racial prejudices, but rather on the current empirical experience of who does well in America and doesn’t e.g. get Affirmative Action because they’re seen to not “need” it, and who does.

His point is that NAM prefers to just Hispanics and (slave-origin) blacks, not all ‘blacks and browns’

Actually it refers to all Hispanics because it’s broad brush and crude, just like government policies such as affirmative action. Most of the Hispanics it’s meant to apply to (as opposed to getting inaccurately swept up in it because the gov’t doesn’t want to make fine distinctions, e.g. Cubans) are strongly indio / peasant Latinos from Central America, rather than Hispanics with significant black blood. Living in the NYC area can distort that a bit because we’ve historically had a lot of the later, though that balance is shifting rapidly.

SA,
All one need do if they really wanna understand who the term “NAM” refers to, is take a quick spin around the Internet-go to Sailer’s site, then Inductivist, Audacious Epigone, Half Sigma, etc, et al. I promise you, they are NOT talking about all these eclectic groups that Doug mentions. Like I said, its a rhetorical Jedi Mindtrick; it really means Black and Hispanic folks. In the latter case, namely Mexicans, although other Hispanic groups could apply as well, such as Puerto Ricans.

Now, because I’m fascinated by how the White Psyche works, I’m interested in where this phraseology came from; and I also note that it came into use around the same time the HBD movement began to take off in terms of the internet. As some suggest that HBD is just another form of racism in scientific drag, one could argue that using “NAM” is just a nice, dare I say it?-*politically correct*-way of saying Nigras and Mexicans.

Problem w/all that is, well, like I told Doug, some of us Darkies actually do read. Shocking I know, but true.

So unless you’re so insecure in your own reasoning capabilities that you have to resort to overwrought black talk, false machoism, and character insults in order to feel like you’re winning… drop dumb shit like this

Seeking Alpha,
Please, please, please, scroll back to the posts made in this thread on Jun 2, 2009-yeasterday, in the 6pm hour or so. There you will find Chic Noir’s comment where she first mentions Social Security and Medicaid as being the highest public welfare expenses this country has ever had. Please see Roissy’s “Editor’s Note” comments, where he clearly uses the term “NAM”. I defy you to tell me he was referring to all those other esoteric groups you and Doug mentioned. We all know exactly what he meant.

Same too w/Dave Alex’s comment, to which Doug responded to, in this very same thread. Again, there’s no secret as to who DA nor Doug, was referring to, and it wasn’t White Cubans or Sephardic Jews. Put bluntly, it was Niggas and Wetbacks, there I said it. And we all know that.

Again, let’s have some straight talk, since this is sort of a “gentlemen’s club” and since this is supposedly the final resting place for “pretty lies”.

Oh, and my general proposition wrt tax expenditures on nonproductive citizens in relation to Social Security and Medicaid stands. If one is really serious about slashing the budget and culling the herd, we all know exactly where to start.

It’s my impression that NAM was invented by S.Asian Indians. First time I ever heard it, and that was YEARs ago, was on GNXP, a genetics esp. human genetics and cultural evolution science watch site that’s very influential, which was founded by two S.Asians, and is still run by one of them, with a several regular guest posters of a wide variety of ethnicities.

Doug,
Thanks for the break down, but again, it sidesteps the point, which is, when you take a spin around the HBD blogosphere, its pretty clear what Sailer, Inductivist, Audacious Epigone, Half Sigma and others mean when they, and/or their readers, mean when they use the phrase “NAM”-and it is NOT White Cubans, Sephardic Jews, Indians from the Punjab, etc. Simply and brutally put, it means Niggas and Wetbacks. Period.

As for Affirmative Action, I’d say that relatively few Hispanics have gained from it, and they’ll be fewer Black folk who’ll gain from it too, for various reasons. Of course, we’re really nibbling around the edges, aren’t we, because we all know who really benefits from Affirmative Action, in the main and most of the time:

WHITE WOMEN.

Take a look at AJ Travis’ blog, he tells you the truth straigh up-most Women in those office gigs don’t really belong there, but they’re there due to AA. And you White guys are *pissed* at this fact, but there is little you can do about it. So, in comes the “NAMs” you can kick around. Makes you feel better, and besides, most of em aren’t any real threat to you anyway.

Like I said Doug, there’s a few of us who’s peeped the game. The gig is up.

What it’s getting at is minorities that are significantly under performing in America, as opposed to ones that aren’t.

A better term would be, AARMs. Affirmative Action Receiving Miniorities. (I made that up. I’ve never seen anyone use it.) However, the overlap is large and in fact, as it happens in America given or immigration numbers, almost total.

And example of where NAM’s != AARMs is Pacific Islanders. They are Asian, more or less, but do get Affirmative Action. I suppose the NAM terminology advocates would say they’re from Oceania. Same would apply to Australian Aboriginies, if we had any here. They certainly get AA in Australia, and I’m sure the 10 we have here do too.

O: Roissy mentioned wrt Black and Brown folks-which is meant by the acronym “NAMs-adds up.
Doug:So no Obsidian, NAM doesn’t mean black and brown people.
What NAM amounts to in effect in America is Blacks and Hispanics/Latinos.
it ISN’T based on color or old racial prejudices, but rather on the current empirical experience of who does well in America and doesn’t
O: The term “NAM” is just a rhetorical reach-around for Black and Brown folks. It don’t mean all these other esoteric/eclectic ethnic/racial groups you tried to shoehorn into the acronym. [He didn’t]
Like I said, its a rhetorical Jedi Mindtrick; it really means Black and Hispanic folks.
Doug: I plainly stated that NAM does in essence largely mean African Americans and strongly indio Hispanics.
O, still seeing disagreement and now descending into racial insults:it [definitely, not largely?]means Niggas and Wetbacks

The ONLY reason it means blacks and Hispanics, primarily, is because they are the two large under performing groups in America. They are the two large minority groups that get affirmative action.

As I said my term AARMs would be better. That’s what people are getting at. (Except for the white racists who were very late to start using the NAM term, as they generally are late on everything.) Of course you more or less equate race realists with racists which is similarly inaccurate. But the left will of course back you up there, all the way.

So you admit that in her state-of-nature purity a woman desires abusive thugs because they make her wet and that it’s only AFTER she realized she can’t “tame” him that she then learns to look elsewhere?

So women are whores at heart, eh?

I find it amazing that you go from this to that. In a woman’s state of nature she goes for who gets the biggest rise out of her hormones without regard to anything else; the SAME as men do. The results are drama, drama, and more drama.

I don’t know about then wanting to “tame” them. The thought never crossed my mind. In my case, I wanted the asshole to leave me alone, but I was too chemically attached (and he to me) for that to happen without a lot more drama. *shudders in disgust*

If you want to put a label on it and deduce that women who are driven by their hormones are “whores” by all means, do so, but I would say they are more “animal” than human at that point; SAME as men.

Have you ever been sexually addicted to someone? Were you a whore then? An opportunistic parasite? A womanizer? A PUA? A Super Alpha Stud? A 24/7 fucking machine? Or a wretched human being? LOL

BTW, the REASON that the government and friendly to AA institutions such as most universities don’t want to make fine distinctions about who gets AA is that their theory, or publicly proclaimed theory at least, for why it’s “necessary” is due to majority white, mostly white male, prejudice. It’s recognized/believed that this theory must work only on crude broad principles rather than through fine distinctions. Voila!

Doug & Bhetti,
Bhetti, thanks for the editing of me and Doug’s posts. And no, I didn’t use the term “Niggas and Wetbacks” to insult Black and Mexican (in the main) folks, I was merely using the words for effect, because, when you hear most people use the term “NAM” there’s a kind of tonality tht goes along w/it that to my mind, makes me think of such words as I used earlier. I hope you see my point.

Doug, I have no problem saying My Bad. Since we’re in agreement on the major point then, I think we can safely dispense with the other what I call esoteric meanings of the term “NAM”, mainly because in the HBD blogosphere and beyond, when such people use the term “NAM” they do NOT mean White Cubans or Indians from Gujarat. They mean African Americans and Mexicans. Now, let’s take up that end of the argument…

I agree with you that the term “NAM” largely refers to the Affirmative Action debate, but as I’ve said before, Black and Mexican folk have in truth, very little to do with the state of things. For example, how many Mexican medical school or law school students, or grads, are there? I don’t know for certain but something tells me not a lot. Similarly, the same can be said for African Americans-most college slots don’t go to them, even when you take Affirmative Action into account.

So again, in a lot of ways, this debate is something of a red herring, because for the most part we all know who’s got a thumb on the scale for real:

WHITE WOMEN.

Again, please see AJ’s blog, read Whiskey, etc, et al. Amy and Heather pose a much bigger threat in his day to day life wrt his livelihood, than do Rashid and Jose’. And I stand by that.

Lastly-I am not now, nor have I ever been on the Left. My political sensibilities have always been in a more Conservative vein, and my life accords with this-I’ve never taken welfare, worked hard for everything I ever had, and played by the rules. As for my “animus”-yes, its there alright. But at least I’m willing to be brutally honest about it. The fact of the matter is that it is very hard to live in America, and NOT have some degree of racial animus, and here I can see where Holder was talking about in his “nation of cowards” speech. What I took away from that was there’s a lot of White folks who won’t openly own up to their own racial animus, for the same reasons why so many posters in the HBD blogosphere wear out the “Anonymous” tag, for fear of being “outed” and losing their job, damage to their reputation, and so on. Personally, I don’t see how this helps anyone, better to let it all hang out and hash it from there. So yea, I have a good degree of racial animus in me, but I try to work it out constructively, w/varying results.

There is no doubt the term NAM has been taken up by racists and bordering on racists, etc. That’s true. They were late to it, but they’ve discovered it.

I’ll actually give you back a point you’ve largely conceded. Most users of NAM aren’t thinking first and foremost of affirmative action. That’s in there but it’s not on the top of their mind. What is on the top of their mind is chronic group underperformance, despite wider society efforts to rectify. That does in effect mean predominantly blacks and the Hispanics we get, for the most part. (E.g. Britain so far as it gets Hispancis will get a very different mix.)

However it’s getting at the same thing that Affirmative Action is meant by it’s supporters to remedy – very sizeable group chronic under performance overall. (which remains a minority of Americans, only about 30-35% at least in the strong form that it’s actually practiced when polls get at that)

Anyway, we respect each other I think, and can talk productively to each other. That’s a good thing.

O: I am happy that cleared things up. This is where a benefit of a woman having less testosterone is clearly delineated?

You should have your own blog to hash out the racial animus issues, because it’s something I’d love to discuss in the open, and the reasons we might feel that way, or that people do. I don’t think this is the place.

Doug: And your soft side is one of the things that make me so crazy about you, really. How’s anyone supposed to find someone like you? Tell me that.

Do you realise what you’re saying?
“Oh, yeah, sara, if only you found someone like me. Sucks for you.”

“Oh, yeah, sara, if only you found a rare and perfectly cut diamond with beautifully balanced multi-faceted planes possibly lying in the street somewhere.”

Doug, Bhetti,
Bhetti, no problem, although I’ve got too many irons in the fire at this point to start up a blog of my own; moreover, I think this is the perfect venue to hash these things out, precisely because the founder of said venue is himself at the very least, amenable to HBD if not an outright supporter of it, and as a result attracts many such people; he and they make all manner of comments relating to people of color, and as I’m a member of said forum, I take it upon myself to engage in the issues they raise. And I think that’s a good thing, since most Whites have, often at their own behest, very limited interaction w/Black folk. They need more real live interaction to counterbalance what they read and hear and see in media terms, in order to bring a sense of perspective.

Doug, yea, we definitely brown man, no problem. But the problem I have in the whole HBD debate, is there seems to be very little in the way of actual solutions being offered, other than what amounts to, Black and Brown/Mexican folk are too dumb, they’re taking our (read: White Male) jobs and they need to go!-and the convo ends there. To date the only person online from said community who has actually laidout a cogent series of solutions, is Steve Sailer, in his five part series on IQ and why we’re so afraid to talk about it. If you or anyone else in the HBDsphere can think of another, I’d be much obliged.

If one takes a step back from the HBDsphere, and just takes a wide eyed view of things, you can’t help but get the impression that there are a lot of White guys who are ANGRY-angry for a whole host of reasons, reason quite frankly, that I think are legitimate. One of the more profound films I’ve seen in more recent years was Crash-and not for the reasons you might think. My favorite character was Sgt. Ryan, played very well by actor Matt Dillon. The scene where Ryan is trying to get help from a haughty Black secretary at a health plan place was quite poignant, and Ryan made a powerful point about some of the real victims of Affirmative Action-Blue Collar White guys, most of whom do not appear on this blog.

And therein lies one of my big problems with Affirmative Action on the Black side-far too many activists don’t wanna acknowledge the fact that for it to work will in essence mean, that some White guys are gonna have to bite the bullet. Its just simple numbers-err body can’t get a seat, if you will. Somebody’s gonna be left standing. We as a nation, have never had that kind of honest discussion, and given the degree of backlash to AA over the years, maybe it makes sense not to mention what I just wrote above. But I think if AA were couched right-if there had been a more open and honest discussion-we might not be in the pickle we’re in now.

Of course, that goes to the meat of the HBD argument, that Blacks simply aren’t as smart as Whites. Alright, let’s accept that as the truth-now what? From what I can tell, no one really seems to care about that, fascinating to me because, these arguments are coming from such obstensibly smart people. The only thing one can conclude, is that those who are making the case, even if they’re right, are doing so from a deep well of anger, that they were denied, robbed of their rightful place, by someone who didn’t deserve it; that, to go further, they must now shoulder the blame and burden of actions that have occured since before they were born, and worse, that simply because of who they are-White Males-they are immediately suspect. Oh Doug, I understand where this deep animus comes from, and again am largely sympathetic to much of it.

The problem though, comes in many forms. One is the utter lack of any solutions from the HBDers, save Sailer, and his mini-series was written nearly a decade ago. Has anyone in the HBDsphere even mentioned it of late? Maybe you know better than me, but I can tell you, I know of no such blogger or commenter, let alone a more prominent voice.

Then comes the really hard part-IQ is in essence, a *value judgment* about a person. Having a lower IQ means, in essence, being a lesser person. How can it be viewed in any other way, in a world which values high IQ so strongly? Admitting you have low IQ is to condemned to a half life of quiet desperation-something Black folk know all too well.

Hence the at times raw, and raucous debates, between WEB DuBois and Booker T. Washington roughly a century ago. As you know, Washington advocated for Blacks to learn how to work with their hands, learn trade and agricultural skills and the like, founding the Tuskeegee Institute; DuBois, arguably America’s first true sociologist and the first Black Man to graduate from Harvard, took umbrage at such a suggestion. There were clear class divisions between the two Men that were made vividly apparent over the course of their debates, and those themes remain with us today.

Yet, what Washington, indeed, what Sailer and Murray (Charles), said was true-everyone is not meant for the Ivy League, or for college in general, for that matter. But when you add a long history of exclusion, discrimination and the like to the mix, it gets hard to convince African Americans, that every Black child wasn’t made to be a doctor, lawyer, Indian chief.

So, one major problem for the HBDers-and let me clear here, I think there is something to be said for much of their arguments-is framing their arguments in such a way that they win more converts than gain more enemies, especially among the groups that matter, the so-called NAMs. As it stands right now, all they look like is a bunch of pissed White geeks, crying into their beer, using cooked up pseudoscience to justify their racism. Perceptions matter.

Default user wrote The estate pays what it can (exempting a small amount for funeral expenses) and the rest is written off (i.e., funded from tax revenues). This way the next of kin effectively contribute to their parent’s end-of-life expenses. It would still be progressive (the wealthy pay more) as poorer estates might raise no money while wealthy estates might cover all expenses.

Wow, this is a good idea Default and I’m not just saying that because I love you.
Some medical expenses like treatment cancer and open heart surgeries can run into the 6 figures. It costs about 1,500 a day to stay in a hospital. If someone is very sick, it won’t take long before they burn through the value of their home. I think your method will require more people to take good care of themselves when they realize that their poor diet and exercise habits will result in less of an inheritance for their children and grandchildren.
We should offer euthanasia to those who are elderly or sick people who would like to expire on their own terms before they run up such high bills that there is nothing left for their loved ones.

Thursday SS and Medicaid are relatively successful in avoiding moral hazard (economic term, look it up) because you have to pay significantly into them to get something back. Moral hazard is endemic to insurance schemes of any kind, but it’s particularly bad when people don’t pay into the system.

The average elderly person is sucking up 3x what they put into the system. There is a stat on that. You can find it somewhere on the www. Another thing, one of the biggest, if not the biggest Medicare expenditure is treatment for type II diabetes(stat on this too).

From what I’ve read, Diabetes can largely be controlled without expensive medicine using diet and exercise.

Chic, Default,
I think the both of you are nibbling around the edges here; I am proposing CUTTING THE OLD FOLKS OFF OF Social Security and Medicaid, the two biggest entitlement programs we have. They get more and more expensive each year. The programs are already unsustainable, as it is. And if we’re really serious about “culling the herd” and “wasteful spending” why can’t just do the darned thing? We all know the deal here-once you hit 70, good luck.

And Chic,
In my last reply to Doug, I take up the “value judgment” implications of the IQ debate, as well as give a historical perspective on the African American side of it by citing the debates that took place between Booker T. Washington and WEB DuBois. Scroll up a piece, you’ll see it.
And holla back😉

this is a good idea Default and I’m not just saying that because I love you.

Chic:
Thanks… for both🙂

Obsidian:
If congress cannot even limit immigration (which has public support) then cutting Social Security (which has no support) is even less likely under the current environment.

However, our failure to change the first will open the opportunity for the second in perhaps twenty to thirty years. A less wealthy majority non-white tax base will be more ready to cut off a majority white (and black) tax spending class. Sadly that is when many here will be drawing it. Be careful what you wish for…

I believe that the first step is to acknowledge that Social Security is a welfare program not insurance. That is, if you are on Social Security you are on welfare. Same for Medicare, it is a form of welfare and not a right.

I used to enjoy abstract political discussions but have lost the taste for them recently. And cutting off Social Security is definitely and abstract discussion because it will not happened any time soon.

youknowI’mright non-Whites in America to slowly wither away since they depend so heavily on welfare pilfered from the tax money of White workers.

chic noir wrote Not so fast, most welfare goes to the elderly in the form of social security and Medicare buddy. So you may want to add elderly whites with the non whites for your ideal America

then you know who wrote [editor: NAMs suck up more than just welfare in public assistance. think unemployment benefits, public housing, prision construction, ER visits, police presence, AA opportunity costs, food stamps, education, etc etc.]

Now if you compare default’s response you can see he is not playing in that field. I was going to respond to the host but I said why bother. He will probably moderate my comment anyway

@Mu- I think you are barking up the wrong tree with default. I agree with most(80%) of what he says. He was not the person who put out the inflammatory comment that I responded to. It seems he was offering a comment on how to cut costs. I don’t think he is a wacky Libertarian or kill/get rid of the “other” type, instead he sees how social security and Medicare are straining the system and looked for a way to cut costs. Really read his comment. He covered your point about how immigration is hurting blue collar blk males such as yourself. With the moving of the factories to the suburbs, we can argue that illegal immigration is part II of the same story

Yikes, first DA now Default. Well at least I know you’ll defend me if we are walking down a dark alley.

Bhetti I suspect it will be a problem within black communities, if it isn’t already. It’s a country-wide problem, enabled by loss of the old values.

Bhetti, not to take this thread to one of those spinning race threads but no taking care of elder folk isn’t a problem amongst African-Americans and Blks from the African continent( & a section of whites) here in America. You are right about it spreading though. I read an article in an Asian newspaper about China (and I think Korea) making laws for children to take care of their elderly parents. It seems that some people would take over their parent’s estate after they reached a certain age but fail to care for them.

Default,
Yea, I hear ya. By now I trust you get where I’m coming from: is the issue *really* about wasting tax dollars and unproductive citizenry, or, is the issue about Black and Brown folks? I think we all know what the answer is, but I like to put errthing on blast. That way, there’s no ambiguity, no guesswork, no mistaking what’s meant by this or that. Get a pair and put em on the line, if you really bout it, bout it. You feel me?

And since I belung to a group that collects least on Social Security (Black Men tend to have shorter lifespans on average) it don’t matter to me. I intend to do the damned thing myself, I been taking care of myself so why should that be any different? Besides, we all know the deal w/SS-it’s unsustainable. You don’t need to be an Ivy League Nobel-winning econ egghead to figure this out.

I say that the past decade especially, leading all the way up to GM’s “death” yesterday, says to us Americans loud and clear, that we can’t have it all-there must be tradeoffs, and either we make them now, or we pay the costs for not doing so later. It’s really that simple. Now, since I’m no stranger to hardship and hard times, aint nothin’ but another day at the office for the Comeback Kid-

Its all you guys, who are prone to doing really crazy stuff, when you go from living high on the hog to sleeping on a grate.

Chic,
Already responded to D, and you’re right, he is trying to deal w/the issue in a more thoughtful manner. I’m waiting for Roissy to chime in so I can step to him about grannie in the old folks’ home. If he’s really serious about culling the herd, I say Ladies First.

Three things that can soothe a man’s soul:
A good fuck
A good meal
and a good rant.

[one day I will try and combine all three]

One day I will cook dinner for you at your home, we will call whiskey over for dinner. I promise you will get all three in🙂

@seeking alpha- brown folks= hispanic folk for the most part. Yes some South East Asians are blk and brown but mu was using in the context of Hispanic people. (slave-origin) blacks I know you didn’t mean anything by it but blks had an existence and societies before slavery

doug As I said my term AARMs would be better
This may indeed be a better acronym.

Doug as most universities don’t want to make fine distinctions about who gets AA is that their theory, or publicly proclaimed theory at least, for why it’s “necessary” is due to majority white, mostly white male, prejudice

I’ve been posting this for a year now, but there are small pockets of Affirmative Action for white males in this country. Towson State University has an Affirmative action program for male students, as the school is about 90% white, it’s safe to say that it’s a program for white males. Do I have a problem with that, HELL NO! I’m glad it’s been implemented, something needs to be done so we won’t have a large number of uneducated males in this country when women, across racial lines, are receiving degrees .

@MU- I want to add that when George Bush was attempting to reform social security about four years ago, one of his selling points to blks was the point that Blk American male life expectancy is 55. Most Blks males aren’t around to collect something which they worked x amount of years to put into.

Mu Here’s my point people-I want to see if we can be consistent w/the logic of the argument, or, if this is really a racial thing.

Yea mu, I was wondering the same thing. For the poster I was responding to, it is a thing of race or “the other”. IIRC, under the Clinton’s welfare reform, people are only given 5 years total to receive welfare. An elderly person who lives to 90+ can suck up social security for 25 or more years.

MU I am proposing CUTTING THE OLD FOLKS OFF OF Social Security and Medicaid, the two biggest entitlement programs we have.

Mu, the reason I threw that out there about the old folks because the commenter seems to think that only NAMS are parasites of the system. Therefore, I mentioned elderly folks eating from the system because I know those two programs are the largest forms of welfare this country has going.

Now I’m not defending default because I love him but I think his suggestion was a good one. There are wealthy elderly people who collect social security and use Medicare. Why shouldn’t their estates be tallied minus any Medicare debts at the end? We should cut them from Social Security too. The 80 year model(carmen) I posted in the female photo post collects social security.

She said she receives SS on one of the morning shows when talking about how she was scammed by Madoff. Carmen said if he had be caught one day later, he would have gotten another 100k check from her. This tells me that she is wealthy enough to not need a SS check to survive month to month.
———————————
Seeking AlphaEngineer
Why so snarky?
He can’t help it but deep down inside he is a nice guy. At least I made him smile the other day.

Chic,
Yup, I done backed down so and so several times up in here. Gotta be consistent with the logic of the arguments-appeals to assertion, ie “because I said so”, trying to use ad hominem, ie, “against the man” arguments and other logical fallacies, will not be allowed. If one is truly serious about getting rid of wasteful spending, while at the same time, getting rid of nonproductive citizens, then it is simply illogical NOT to consider getting rid of Social Security and Medicaid, fullstop. Period. In fact, if one is truly serious about these things, you’d have to *start* there. Why? Because, as Willie Sutton said, its where the money is.

Now if its just a racial animus thing, fine-but then be a Man about and say so. Don’t try to make highbrow, erudite comments, no need for graphs and ten dollar words-just simply say you think Black and Brown/Mexican folk do nor bring nothing good for this society and thus, they should be cutoff from *any* form of help or aid. Its really that simple.

You know, I’ve been reading a lot of Kevin MacDonald lately, and he came up w/a very interesting concept, something he calls Implied Whiteness.

What he means by this, is that Whites will act in their own ethnic interests, *but they can’t openly say so*. So, for example, when Whites, regardless of political affiliation, send their kids to virtually all White schools, be theyr public or private, that’s an example of Implied Whiteness. Or, when White folks, especially those from the South/Heartland, go gaa gaa for NASCAR, that’s yet another example of Implied Whiteness.

Now, my reason for mentioning this is because, when I read/hear White guys talking about NAMs, I’m reminded of the kinda “reach around” way of doing things that MacDonald talked about. According to him, the reason why Implied Whiteness caught hold was because a White person could be punished in a myriad of ways-from being demoted or outright fired from his job, to harming his public reputation, and more. Yet, so many Whites, including the SWPLers, embrace Implied Whiteness.

Well, that kinda pisses guys like me off because we see such a thing as kinda underhanded and sneaky. And thus, not very Manly. Hence the reason for me hammering down on the NAMs supposedly sucking up public monies vs Social Security/Medicaid. I want to see if those who feel that way will Man Up and say so, outright, no reacharounds, no “Implied Whiteness”, just straightup say it.

I’m still waiting. Like all the other times.

Hmm.

Also: did you see what I said to Doug? Just scroll up a bit. I think a powerful part of the IQ debate that no one seems to have touched on, is the simole fact that having a lower IQ marks you as a *lesser being*,ie, you are now ok to being treated in a “less than” fashion on a whole range of things and in a whole of areas, from cradle to grave. And honestly, who wants to sign up for such a half-life?

MU there are a lot of White guys who are ANGRY-angry for a whole host of reasons, reason quite frankly, that I think are legitimate

Fun fact: I agree I think they have legitimate reasons too.

IIRC, I came across something where Obama mentioned that perhaps AA could be reshaped to include poor and working class whites. I wonder if the Republicans would find beef with that. Something tells me they’ll say that Obama is trying to buy votes instead of attempting to mend a broken fence.

MU Of course, that goes to the meat of the HBD argument, that Blacks simply aren’t as smart as Whites. Alright, let’s accept that as the truth-now what? From what I can tell, no one really seems to care about that, fascinating to me because, these arguments are coming from such ostensibly smart people.

You’ve made this point about five times but no one has wrote anything in form of a response addressing your question. It seems to me, that some people like to repeat the White/Black iq thing because it makes them feel better about themselves. The much missed T aka ricky raw addressed this point months ago. When you have nothing else that is worthwhile, you can hang onto the backs (or achievements) of dead people who share a similar phenotype.

Mu But when you add a long history of exclusion, discrimination and the like to the mix, it gets hard to convince African Americans, that every Black child wasn’t made to be a doctor, lawyer, Indian chief.
And As it stands right now, all they look like is a bunch of pissed White geeks, crying into their beer, using cooked up pseudoscience to justify their racism. Perceptions matter.
I agree MU I agree.

Anyway, checkout my comments to Doug on Washington/DuBois, etc.
good stuff MU, if I may tweak it a little. Washington was for skilled trade education and book learning. He believed that we should be a jack of all trades group. Dubois on the other hand, wanted us to be an academic group. I think it was the shame of slavery that’s partially responsible for Dubois’s outlook.

…is the issue *really* about wasting tax dollars and unproductive citizenry, or, is the issue about Black and Brown folks?

I am not sure what you are expecting. I get the impression you believe I labor under some malevolence or something.

Here are my views on Blacks/African-Americans:
[For this black/African-American means people whose forbearers were brought here against their will as slaves.]
– They are fully Americans.

– They are a part of our shared history.

– They are due all the rights that every citizen is because they are citizens.

– While Black Americans have a distinct culture it is largely commingled with the broader American culture.

– Indeed black Americans have contributed to our culture.

– Again: African-American = American. They can keep their hyphen if they like.

– I do not fear or distrust African-Americans. I don’t even fear them gaming white chicks.🙂

On HBD stuff:
– I believe in the concept of race. Although hard to tie down in scientific terms it does match human experience*.

– I believe that racial and ethnic groups will tend to trust themselves more than the other. A pity but in the absence of actual hostility not a major problem.**

– I believe in IQ/g as a measurement of cognitive abilities.

– I believe that intelligence is an important thing but it is not the only thing.

– I believe that higher intelligence tends to lead to better outcomes across a range of life’s challenges.

– I believe it is likely there are differences in cognitive abilities between the races.

– Indeed, I believe it likely that there is a range of skill and temperament differences between the races.

– I am less certain that these differences are immutable.

– I do not believe such differences are a cause for celebration, boasting, or even shame.

– The only reason to consider difference is to make rational public policy.

– I have no idea how to make such discussions less painful.

– When considering IQ in public policy, the aim should be to make the world easier for those of less intelligence (current policy/laws tend to do the opposite).

– We need to find ways to make our current high-tech world work for those of all abilities.

– I would love to see a world where everyone can find some respect and make a real contribution. This likely involves some consideration of cognitive ability.

– Welfare provides for survival it does not provide for a meaningful existence.

On immigration:
– I believe that mass immigration has made it much harder for those on the left side of the bell curve.

– Because it tends to reward capital while hurting labor it has widened the wealth divide. This creates resentment and division.

– Increased population puts a burden on infrastructure and tends to raise house prices. These effects are felt more by working and middle class Americans

– Multiculturalism makes no sense. You either have a culture (shared mores, habits and ethics) or you don’t. [don’t = chaos]

– As we become more diverse and multicultural we need more and more laws to manage things that were previously handled by habits, mores, and tradition. This increases the power of the state and leads to more conflict.

Doug Oh sure, are white racists going to seize on the term, sure. But that’s not where it comes from, or where the great majority of people who use it are coming from. I’m defining racism not as noticing empirical racial differences and talking about them, but making them up based on preconceived ideas rather than evidence.

You know, Sailor moderates his comments. Some of the things he lets through his filter would make someone see his site as Sto.rm F lite. The craziest thing about the HBD movement is how many of the White males who’re front and center are married to non white women. There are some in the HBD community who are aligned with the Fronter crew. I wonder if the HBD guys get it, if the “fronters” have their way, those who are married to non white women will have to leave maybe kill their wives.

Doug doug1
Default –
PAGING Default. Hey, YO Default.
Get a load of this ^^^ man.
This is not something you want to let grow cold!!

Oh gosh, start no drama sir. I made comment whatever smile with what I wrote about him on PA’s camping trip.

Chic,
Yup, I done backed down so and so several times up in here. Gotta be consistent with the logic of the arguments-appeals to assertion, ie “because I said so”, trying to use ad hominem, ie, “against the man” arguments and other logical fallacies, will not be allowed. If one is truly serious about getting rid of wasteful spending, while at the same time, getting rid of nonproductive citizens, then it is simply illogical NOT to consider getting rid of Social Security and Medicaid, fullstop. Period. In fact, if one is truly serious about these things, you’d have to *start* there. Why? Because, as Willie Sutton said, its where the money is.

Now if its just a racial animus thing, fine-but then be a Man about and say so. Don’t try to make highbrow, erudite comments, no need for graphs and ten dollar words-just simply say you think Black and Brown/Mexican folk do nor bring nothing good for this society and thus, they should be cutoff from *any* form of help or aid. Its really that simple.

You know, I’ve been reading a lot of Kevin MacDonald lately, and he came up w/a very interesting concept, something he calls Implied Whiteness.

What he means by this, is that Whites will act in their own ethnic interests, *but they can’t openly say so*. So, for example, when Whites, regardless of political affiliation, send their kids to virtually all White schools, be theyr public or private, that’s an example of Implied Whiteness. Or, when White folks, especially those from the South/Heartland, go gaa gaa for NASCAR, that’s yet another example of Implied Whiteness.

Now, my reason for mentioning this is because, when I read/hear White guys talking about NAMs, I’m reminded of the kinda “reach around” way of doing things that MacDonald talked about. According to him, the reason why Implied Whiteness caught hold was because a White person could be punished in a myriad of ways-from being demoted or outright fired from his job, to harming his public reputation, and more. Yet, so many Whites, including the SWPLers, embrace Implied Whiteness.

Well, that kinda pisses guys like me off because we see such a thing as kinda underhanded and sneaky. And thus, not very Manly. Hence the reason for me hammering down on the NAMs supposedly sucking up public monies vs Social Security/Medicaid. I want to see if those who feel that way will Man Up and say so, outright, no reacharounds, no “Implied Whiteness”, just straightup say it.

I’m still waiting. Like all the other times.

Hmm.

Also: did you see what I said to Doug? Just scroll up a bit. I think a powerful part of the IQ debate that no one seems to have touched on, is the simple fact that having a lower IQ marks you as a *lesser being*,ie, you are now ok to being treated in a “less than” fashion on a whole range of things and in a whole of areas, from cradle to grave. And honestly, who wants to sign up for such a half-life?

My darling default wrote I am not sure what you are expecting. I get the impression you believe I labor under some malevolence or something. No, I think he understands now. Mu reread your comment and sees where you’re coming from.

Default believe that racial and ethnic groups will tend to trust themselves more than the other. A pity but in the absence of actual hostility not a major problem.**

This is true and I see that you wrote ethnic groups which becomes more important when you move into places where the people are racially homogenous. When you move to places where people are from one ethnic group, take Somalia, clan becomes more important.

Welfare provides for survival it does not provide for a meaningful existence. Epic comment and I agree. DA and I have posted on this in the past.

She said I would get all three in but not with whom. I will read the small print very carefully. I think Whiskey should too.

the first two from me of course and the last one from Whiskey. Then again, maybe ST would be a better person for the argument since he isn’t a former paramour.

Mu is the simple fact that having a lower IQ marks you as a *lesser being*,ie, you are now ok to being treated in a “less than” fashion on a whole range of things and in a whole of areas, from cradle to grave. And honestly, who wants to sign up for such a half-life?

I agree, there are some who want to force sterilization on the low iq. Now while I agree that those without the skills and material wealth to raise 5 children should make due with 1 child, I’m not for forced sterilization. As you know MU, Eugenics isn’t new, it’s been around in Sweden, the US and Canada and I read a few years ago about it being in eastern Europe. Romania I think, for the Gypsies/ Romanies. PA can give more info on them I’m sure.

No one wants to be on the bottom of the barrel and of course AAs aren’t signing up for that spot regardless to what dr. Murphy or anyone else writes about us.

You can see the “they are less than argument” taking place with the things HS posts about Sara Palin. Look, I wasn’t a fan of the woman but there were qualities about her that I like and respect. HS, on the other hand, ran Palin over the coals day after day for the most minor offense. Yes, she comes from humble beginnings, but so do most Americans. I don’t think she is anti intellectualism but she isn’t ashamed of her working class roots. HS at times seems like a social climber who lacks social skills.

I’m not typing this because I dislike him because we all have our good and bad sides but HS comes across as very bitter. Something tells me he is on the spectrum too. So he will have trouble climbing to the top because he lacks that aura &charisma that is need when you are working your way up from the bottom. Without the aura & charisma neither Obama, Clinton or Edwards would of made it to the “top”. You see people like Gore and Bush II going so far because they had a hand up because of wealth and family connections.

Funny enough, it looks like the “bitter nerds” are just calling for a reversal of things. They want to be on top for their intellect and push the good-looking, strong & attractive alphas to the bottom. As someone said recently, it will look like Animal Farm, one of my mom’s favorite books. She was so excited when TNT made a TV movie about that book.

Blk vs wht troll (2)If blacks are inferior….they were shipped over here as slaves and white are superior

Read your history!!! Whites were shipped over as slaves too. Those wealthy influential WASPs who reside in New England that trace their ancestors back to the Mayflower enjoyed the fruits of your white working class ancestors too. The History of the world is about one group fighting taking advantage of another for wealth, resources, women, and for the hell of it.

Mu Now if its just a racial animus thing, fine-but then be a Man about and say so. Don’t try to make highbrow, erudite comments, no need for graphs and ten dollar words-just simply say you think Black and Brown/Mexican folk do nor bring nothing good for this society and thus, they should be cutoff from *any* form of help or aid. Its really that simple.

*stands up*
Bravo Mu, I don’t get why people try to jump through hoops either. Just say what you mean and mean what you say.

blk vs. white The funny thing is that you dont see them obsessing over the IQ of asians over whites. pathetic
that’s because for that crowd, it rubbs some of them the wrong way.

I dont disagree with you.
I see but i don’t agree with your reasoning. Maybe it was more empathy and compassion on the part of some whites vs outright trickery.

Will you just fucking read my entire post before replying?😆
LOL I’m sorry sir. Sometimes we women talk and think too much. You know we are too emotional.

On Half Sigma:
You ain’t sayin’ nothin’ but a word, sista. Its real easy to peep the Man’s whole card. Now, word is that he’s of Jewish background, and if that’s true, then there’s tremendous pressure to become “successful” in some way, because as we all know, Jews are not only very smart, but they put a spectular amount of energy and focus into education. So, I instantly got the impression that Half Sigma was a lot like a top seeded NBA Draft pick-comes outta the draft in the top five picks, and goes BUST. Never lives up to his potential. And that’s *huge*-because, for Darkies like you and me, well, we’re not expected to go as far in life. Merely avoiding Baby Mama and Daddy drama, staying out of jail, etc, is small miracle enough. But someon like Half Sigma being a wash? Whew. So, yea, all the obessessing over “NAMs” and IQ and the like, just merely came off to me as hatin’-hatin’ of a scapegoating kind. I suppose the higher the IQ, the smaller the balls, hmm?

Default has mentioned the idea that the more diversity a locale has, the less civic pride and as Fukuyama put it, “trust” said locale will have. I’m not sure about that, and here’s why.

For decades, and at a time when Black folk faced in your face racism, Black folk expressed a desire to live peacefully among and with Whites-it was White folk that sprayed em with hoses, sic’d dogs on em, beat em up w/batons, humg em from trees often mutilated, barred em from going to school w/their kids, kept em out of their neighborhoods, etc, et al. Black folks have consistently shown that they’re willing to trust Whites accross a wide array of areas, which is why when Conservatives bitched and moaned about how Black folk voting for Obama was “racist” I said bullshit-Black have voted for far more Whites in elective office than the other way around. So, no, I reject the notion that Black folk in particular aren’t willing to be civic minded. As far as I’m concerned, we ain’t got NOTHING else to prove to any White person, if anything its the other way around. We bled for this country, fought for it, died for it, marched and prayed and demonstrated, in the hope of showing our White Brothers the meaning of civilization, often at times when we were still being grossly mistreated. So no, I reject, out of hand Default’s argument there. W/all due respect.

And BVW makes a powerful point, something I was gonna get to earlier-IQ is a rather narrow measurement into a person’s character or potentials. There are a lot of things it can’t measure, things that as it happens, Black folks happen to be quite talented at-like improvisation for example. And of course, IQ can’t measure a person’s empathy, or compassion, or loyalty or trustworthyness, etc. And given the events of the past decade in the business/academic world-where obstensibly the “best and brightest” are to be found-I think those who are cheerleading so hard for IQ might want to slow their roll a bit.

You’ve become my buddy. When you do show up again, let me just say you have a golden opportunity. Well you know that at least sort of but I mean more than that. She wants to help take you where you want to go. Or rather make it easy for you. Because you’re my bud I’ve been staying out of your way during the warming and extended conversation even though in a way you “snuck in”. No worries. At first just talking to a girl that is very attractive to you I know (and attractive to me too). You were both having enough fun that I didn’t try to muscle in to keep my developing online play third. Cause, well I’ve said. Right now I don’t know if I could. Look this could be a bit more than play for both of you. Aside from RL (she’s somewhere in Canada I’m about sure, thinking Vancouver but that’s a thin guess) this could be tryout practice for what you both want in maybe genuinely complementary ways. I don’t have your email through your name link and didn’t want to openly give mine on here so this is necessarily open but at least another thread you visit but she hasn’t. In a way this is overblown but in a way maybe it isn’t. So long as it’s going anything like this, clear field from me buddy. And Chic, you stay out of this too, except in helpful playing with our mutual friend, ok? Out.

That is, women have no conscious awareness of their true sexual instincts.

Their instincts for what turns them on, and their instincts for what they try to get out of men.

Everything “just happens” to women. With no notion of their motivations, they are always blameless.

The first time I got a clear picture of cognitive dissonance was in Douglas Adams’ Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy, where two headed Zaphod had re-wired his brain, such that if he were to think about his brain being re-wired, he’d be re-directed in thought.

Matuer men at least can use logic to keep their minds on track – women can not – and so cognitive dissonance does not allow them to see negative aspects of themself.

That is, women have no conscious awareness of their true sexual instincts.

Their instincts for what turns them on, and their instincts for what they try to get out of men.

Everything “just happens” to women. With no notion of their motivations, they are always blameless.

The first time I got a clear picture of cognitive dissonance was in Douglas Adams’ Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy, where two headed Zaphod had re-wired his brain, such that if he were to think about his brain being re-wired, he’d be re-directed in thought.

Mature men at least can use logic to keep their minds on track – women can not – and so cognitive dissonance does not allow them to see negative aspects of themself.

So they are always blameless. They are wired like Zaphod – to be unable to know of their deepest motivations.

So, no, I reject the notion that Black folk in particular aren’t willing to be civic minded. Where did he post that?

As far as I’m concerned, we ain’t got NOTHING else to prove to any White person, if anything its the other way around. We bled for this country, fought for it, died for it, marched and prayed and demonstrated, in the hope of showing our White Brothers the meaning of civilization, often at times when we were still being grossly mistreated. So no, I reject, out of hand Default’s argument there. W/all due respect I agree with this 100% MU.

I’ve generally wondered if the variance between both groups is caused by white ancestry on the part of the DuBois supporters. IIRC, he is of Haitian and white ancestry…

Regardless, I suspect the DuBois supporters view academics as the tool to get black people into real positions of power with the ability to affect change. In other words, black men with skilled trades are still blue collar men who are incapable of fighting the white elites, but black men with a high ranking education can compete and fight against the white elite and give us “a seat at the table”. In other words, unless all black people are members of the upper class, then we are not true equals with whites.

First off Dave Alex, you need to study history a bit more. A tremendous amount of real policy change came directly from the streets. See the American Labor Movement, for example, and, as you have a thing for trains, the history of the Pullman Porters.

DuBois notion of a “Talented Tenth” has been the source of much debate, to this day. There are those who argued that he fostered the very same kinds of elitism that kept Black folks down and divided along House/Field, Light/Dark skinned lines. And Washington had the ear of the President at the time, we cannot say the same of DuBois.

Ain’t doing no setting up Chic. Just stepping aside for a buddy. He end runned me (or was it up the sparsely defended middle) by just having a detailed, as in very, Meyers Briggs analysis discussion. For ever and ever. And then….. Well I’m not from hunger including around here and he’s a bud and that’s the story.

Obsidian/DA @
Now I’m going to piss off some. It is strange how threads mutate… If I lived at the time, I would have preferred Marcus Garvey over Dubois. Garvey get’s a bad rap from people who really haven’t actually read him, or if they have read him just did so superficially and lacking depth.

Objections to Dubois are along the lines of Washington’s, Carver’s and Garvey’s alike. Dubois suffered from an intellectual need to create an intelligentsia vanguard within the black community, advancing its needs, his talented tenth. Such a vision was deeply elitist. Not that there’s something necessarily wrong with elitism, like all things it has its time and place, but it does illustrate that the dude was deeply, seriously, out of touch with the real needs of his people at the time. Elitists typically are out of touch with the real needs of non elites.

A community needed practical skills and business experience, economics precedes all. Dubois’s was a highly intellectual, bourgeois elitist who suffered from a feeling of intellectual inferiority vis a dominant white WASP elite culture, in particular its upper middle and upper classes. He shared this feeling of inferiority with progressive intellectuals from eastern and central European Ashkenazi Jewish extraction and became, somewhat, a fellow traveler. Both had the typical resentments of highly intelligent and intellectually inclined individuals from historically ostracized and oppressed minorities in a dominant culture racially, and religiously, opposed to their people. The need to prove oneself (why did Ashkenazim intellectually outshine German Christians in fin-de-siècle Austria? When you have something to prove you work overtime..)

Dubois was also initially a bit of a Marxist. Most communist and socialist leaders were elitists, not many actually came from the real working class. Look at the entirety of British Fabian socialism, and their liberal fellow travelers in Roosevelt’s and Wilson’s Democratic party circles. Yeah, such people loved Blue Collar folk…. from a distance. Their concern with academic empowerment, of a narrow elite, in an age in which many of our ancestors were literally a generation off cotton fields, and often not even this, was deeply impractical and haunts the community to this day.

Dubois’s basic disposition reeks of a Fabian, not Marxist Leninist, leaning. In other words, he had all the hallmarks of acting on a vision of socialist gradualism imposed from on high, by an elite of enlightened intellectuals, upon the masses, to gradually mold society into a utopia.

Carver, Washington, and Garvey had primary concerns with entrepreneurship and economic self empowerment, weeding out deeply rooted dysfunctional cultural traits and habits, and a systematic intelligent approach to useful education. Their aims were pragmatic. In Garvey’s case pragmatic mixed with a naïve but ambitious utopianism.

Carver and Washington also had the intuition that political quietism and assimilation was the best choice, something I may have disagreed with *at that time* but 100 years later certainly the situation is massively different, sitting 100 years later I probably would have written Booker and George W. a large check. At the time Garvey’s ambitious and aggressive desire for independent statehood would have seemed like a good idea. The general establishment slur was misconstruing him as a rabble rouser, his real stance was more subtle. If white America didn’t want colored folks then why stick around? Why not go somewhere else and start an independent nation building project? White America wouldn’t have to worry about its darkies and Blacks, as conditioned by our unique experiences here, simply wouldn’t fit in anywhere else in the traditional black world (see the massive eventual failures of Liberia and Sierra Leone, both of which are more complex than the standard media depiction of barbaric coloreds running amok chopping people’s heads off, many of Liberia’s failures were due to an elitist DUBOIS LIKE ESTABLISHMENT, but that’s food for another story)

Garvey was intensely interested in economic bootstrapping as a prelude to the eventual establishment of an independent state somewhere else. His rhetoric was colorful and circus like because he knew how to get a crowd’s attention. He knew he was dealing with simple farming folk, who like a good show, not bloody intellectuals. And the man was utterly self made, unlike Dubois who in spite of his impressive intellect was not as much of a self made man.

Garvey was an honest to god working class hero who in essence told people to get off their asses, work for themselves, and build things of value. Ultimately he wanted them to build a civilization of their own. Given a couple of generations a rural and uneducated population would have built business expertise, self confidence, and found ways to move further up the educational chain.

Hell, it worked for my family. Both sides. And many families. Working class entrepreneurs, hustled money, saved, spent very little, bought farmland in the North after getting swindled out of their land in the south (happened a lot back then), started side ventures for extra revenue in addition to the farm (my grandma’s father ran my county’s first Garbage company), saved more money, invested it in better equipment, sent the sons to college by the late 1940s, before affirmative action ever existed. That side was established decades ago.

One grandpa worked for the railroads and ran a Janitorial service part time while my grandma became a school teacher, and sent my Dad to medical school. My mother’s father went to College after getting out of the Army after Korea, a History major (again before affirmative action) he worked for the Post Office but ran businesses on the side. My Mother’s mother was pretty, she became a model and an actress (was on one episode of Route 66 and was in a few magazines) but she started doing catering on the side. So on, and so forth. These were all people who followed a Marcus Garvey B. Washington and G.W. Carver approach – NOT a Dubois one. Grassroots entrepreneurs. At the third generation the middle class Boughi professional vision wins out over the entrepreneurial one, which marks a basic failure to pass on the very values that got such families to where they are. This is due to societal pressure and progressive visions often encountered in college and in the general media. Still, the end result is a hell of a lot better than working plantations. No? There are still people in deep Georgia and Alabama working the fields living in shacks. Their ancestors were people who didn’t get the memo… Mine did, and Obsidian’s did, though taking somewhat different paths.

To my knowledge Garvey was the only black man to have a publically traded corporation in that age. I could be wrong in this, but if I am correct in my memory this is quite a feat back in that age, and it beats Dubois’s hand wringing about pulling people into some nebulous and ineffectual liberal intelligentsia. Dubois’s vision was initially rooted in a 19th century gentleman scholar’s vision. He simply didn’t understand his time, or his people.

People need businesses and trade skills, not progressive policies, as a prelude to social advancement. Money talks in this age money making forms the playing field upon which social Darwinism then and now operated. He who has the capital sets his own rules. Many privately view the raw ability to make manage and grow capital as a higher mark of superiority in THIS particular age, than intellectual advancement into the managerial classes. This is why Dubois types to this day flood the non profit sector, government services and burercracies, unwittingly becoming tools serving interests beyond their small comprehensions.. This is why Bill Gates types drop out of college and hire Ph.D.’s to do their dirty work, for “high incomes” (wow, $250K a year working for a drop out with a net worth in the billions. Can you spell “sucker”?)

DA you are an immigrant, look at Ethiopian and Somali immigrant patterns in northern Cities. Every Ethiopian family I know is entrepreneurial. They buy shite businesses like parking lots and Quick-e-marts, develop them, hustle, scrape, send their clever sons and hot daughters to college, and move on. They also start playing the stock market. Somalis do this, from what I’ve seen, but to a lesser degree. Both end up being disillusioned at the degree of acceptance in the larger society they can win, but what do you expect? You’re an immigrant, and a darkie. At least they end up with a large wad of cash.

Indians are notorious for this, why do you think that every motel from the Appalachians to New York are run by people with the surname of Patel?

You are operating from a Dubois vision, the ticket into the establishment is not necessarily good grades and golf matches. It is money and business savvy. With that under your belt, the social entrance of your children into private prep schools and universities is icing on the cake. Instead of icing on a Styrofoam model.

I’m having a hard time keeping up with every thread. I feel I may have to quit my (amazing) job just to read all the comments. I almost missed the one I linked. Well at least I now know you didn’t drop me like a hot potato and I feel better. The absense of your comments to me, seemed cold and cruel and so unilke the man you are, now I know you truly are a gentleman (meant only in the alpha way of course.)

Kamal,
I tip my Kangol to you, sir. Excellent comments in picking up where I left off, and indeed, our respective histories are quite similar.

I just wanted to touch on one other aspect of the IQ-Race debate on the part of HBDers that really bothers me. At the root of their argument is the idea of a meritocracy-that those who advance do so, because they are simply the best.

Never before, has a Prettier Lie, been told.

For anyone who has lived any length of time on this planet knows and knows well, understands that so very often “merit” is among the *last* things to be considered. And for the HBDers, many of whom seem to be smart people, to tout this line of argument, either shows them to be extremely naive, or extremely disengenuous. Black folk know very well the old “Qualified” line, many of us-present company included-have heard it foisted on them quite a few times.

Like any other abstract principle, “merit” has to be taken and viewed within context of other factors; now, having said that, those “factors” can be good or bad. But again, to think that pure, raw “merit” wins or should win, the day, is to flirt w/utopian visions, and we all know how they tend to work out.

With that under your belt, the social entrance of your children into private prep schools and universities is icing on the cake

I’m pretty much well aware at this point that my entry into the elite is basically crushed, hence the obsession of IQ and high rank in a potential wife. In other words, I’ll need somebody who is smart and has enough connections to ensure that my kids can get into a good private school, selective college, and high ranking career.

This is due to societal pressure and progressive visions often encountered in college and in the general media.

That’s the issue at hand. You’ll see high ranking groups such as WASPs and Jews in professional positions with high ranking incomes, and when you look at the state of the black community, you’d want that for yourself not just on a personal level or even for familial pride, but to improve the status of the black community so that we’re no longer just “proles” or “proles with money”, but true equals represented in the upper class to the point where we can shut down the racists and race realists.

Look it up. He had the ear of many prominent White folk of the period; quite a few donated money so he could build Tuskeegee, and he was often invited to the White House. We cannot say the same thing of DuBois.

As for you, you’ve often mentioned what you’d like in a wife, despite the fact that this notion is in direct conflict w/your stated life’s purpose, which is to jackoff to porn and engage in “non dates”.

So, my questions to you are as follows:

1. How do you reconcile that which I’ve just stated above, w/o looking like a complete and utter hypocrite? Please explain?

And

2. Given your own relatively low station and refusal to improve yourself in any major way in order to attract any female worth the banging, on what basis do you hope to attract such a well connected, high IQ Woman, who would actually be willing to marry you? Again, I need clarification. Please explain?

Well at least I now know you didn’t drop me like a hot potato and I feel better. The absense of your comments to me, seemed cold and cruel and so unilke the man you are, now I know you truly are a gentleman (meant only in the alpha way of course.)

Hey! Not so fast. I reserve the right to flirt, a little, from time to time. You guys can’t deny me THAT. As well, things fizzle there, as most things do (but I hope not, I think, or I should hope not anyway, I should), all bets are off. You’ll have to gird for another doug attempt. Just sayin. 😉

Just to be clear, when I use “diversity” it is not a code word for non-white. It is not a code word for majority black. I mean an area that has different racial and ethnic groups all pushed together.

By this definition, a majority black area will not be “diverse.”

Of course different groups can work together, especially for a particular goal (in this case desegregation). However, in day-to-day business there will be less cooperation.

Another person to document this was Robert Putnam. Putnam is no conservative, race-realist, HBDer. He is solidly in the mainstream of academia. It was his research that highlighted the problem. He actually tried to withhold the paper but eventually released it about six years after completion.